You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@lucenenet.apache.org by Simone Chiaretta <si...@gmail.com> on 2010/11/11 10:26:52 UTC
Already some forks of Lucene.Net going on
Seems like a few forks of Lucene.Net already started, with the intent to
make a full .NET version of Lucene.
http://aimee.codeplex.com/
<http://aimee.codeplex.com/>http://lucere.codeplex.com/
<http://lucere.codeplex.com/>This shows that having a real .NET API is
something that developers care about.
Simone
--
Simone Chiaretta
Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider
Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz
RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber
twitter: @simonech
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
"Life is short, play hard"
RE: Already some forks of Lucene.Net going on
Posted by "Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]" <ca...@caspershouse.com>.
I agree, and as I've said before, if people want to explore those
paths on their own, that's their choice, as long as they abide by the
constraints of the ASF.
- Nick
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Carrico [mailto:Todd.Carrico@match.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 10:38 AM
To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: Already some forks of Lucene.Net going on
Pretty sure the lucene.net still has support in the community. I don't
think it's an either or kind of thing.
-----Original Message-----
From: Hans Merkl [mailto:hm@hmerkl.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 8:31 AM
To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Already some forks of Lucene.Net going on
I don't know if I like these forks. They may be able to get a nice .NET
version for the current Lucene version but it will be even harder than the
line by line port to keep up with changes in Java Lucene.
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 03:45, Simone Chiaretta
<si...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Searching on codeplex doesn't seem like there are project called "Lucene":
>
>
>
http://www.codeplex.com/site/search?query=Lucene&sortBy=Relevance&licenses=|
&ac=3<http://www.codeplex.com/site/search?query=Lucene&sortBy=Relevance&lice
nses=%7C&ac=3>
>
> <
>
http://www.codeplex.com/site/search?query=Lucene&sortBy=Relevance&licenses=|
&ac=3<http://www.codeplex.com/site/search?query=Lucene&sortBy=Relevance&lice
nses=%7C&ac=3>
> >there
> is Luce*R*e if that's what you are referring to
>
> Simone
>
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 5:27 AM, George Aroush <ge...@aroush.net> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for letting us know. If that project takes off and proves
itself,
> > that's great. There would not be a need for Lucene.Net.
> >
> > It seems to me the project over at codeplex.com is being called "Lucene"
> > --
> > IANAL, but I don't believe they can do so (or even use "Lucene.Net").
> > Someone need to check and advice the team.
> >
> > -- George
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Simone Chiaretta [mailto:simone.chiaretta@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:27 AM
> > To: lucene-net-user
> > Subject: Already some forks of Lucene.Net going on
> >
> > Seems like a few forks of Lucene.Net already started, with the intent to
> > make a full .NET version of Lucene.
> >
> > http://aimee.codeplex.com/
> > <http://aimee.codeplex.com/>http://lucere.codeplex.com/
> >
> > <http://lucere.codeplex.com/>This shows that having a real .NET API is
> > something that developers care about.
> >
> > Simone
> >
> > --
> > Simone Chiaretta
> > Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider
> > Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz
> > RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber
> > twitter: @simonech
> >
> > Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
> > "Life is short, play hard"
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Simone Chiaretta
> Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider
> Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz
> RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber
> twitter: @simonech
>
> Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
> "Life is short, play hard"
>
RE: Already some forks of Lucene.Net going on
Posted by Todd Carrico <To...@match.com>.
Pretty sure the lucene.net still has support in the community. I don't think it's an either or kind of thing.
-----Original Message-----
From: Hans Merkl [mailto:hm@hmerkl.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 8:31 AM
To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Already some forks of Lucene.Net going on
I don't know if I like these forks. They may be able to get a nice .NET
version for the current Lucene version but it will be even harder than the
line by line port to keep up with changes in Java Lucene.
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 03:45, Simone Chiaretta
<si...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Searching on codeplex doesn't seem like there are project called "Lucene":
>
>
> http://www.codeplex.com/site/search?query=Lucene&sortBy=Relevance&licenses=|&ac=3<http://www.codeplex.com/site/search?query=Lucene&sortBy=Relevance&licenses=%7C&ac=3>
>
> <
> http://www.codeplex.com/site/search?query=Lucene&sortBy=Relevance&licenses=|&ac=3<http://www.codeplex.com/site/search?query=Lucene&sortBy=Relevance&licenses=%7C&ac=3>
> >there
> is Luce*R*e if that's what you are referring to
>
> Simone
>
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 5:27 AM, George Aroush <ge...@aroush.net> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for letting us know. If that project takes off and proves itself,
> > that's great. There would not be a need for Lucene.Net.
> >
> > It seems to me the project over at codeplex.com is being called "Lucene"
> > --
> > IANAL, but I don't believe they can do so (or even use "Lucene.Net").
> > Someone need to check and advice the team.
> >
> > -- George
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Simone Chiaretta [mailto:simone.chiaretta@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:27 AM
> > To: lucene-net-user
> > Subject: Already some forks of Lucene.Net going on
> >
> > Seems like a few forks of Lucene.Net already started, with the intent to
> > make a full .NET version of Lucene.
> >
> > http://aimee.codeplex.com/
> > <http://aimee.codeplex.com/>http://lucere.codeplex.com/
> >
> > <http://lucere.codeplex.com/>This shows that having a real .NET API is
> > something that developers care about.
> >
> > Simone
> >
> > --
> > Simone Chiaretta
> > Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider
> > Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz
> > RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber
> > twitter: @simonech
> >
> > Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
> > "Life is short, play hard"
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Simone Chiaretta
> Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider
> Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz
> RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber
> twitter: @simonech
>
> Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
> "Life is short, play hard"
>
Re: Already some forks of Lucene.Net going on
Posted by Hans Merkl <hm...@hmerkl.com>.
I don't know if I like these forks. They may be able to get a nice .NET
version for the current Lucene version but it will be even harder than the
line by line port to keep up with changes in Java Lucene.
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 03:45, Simone Chiaretta
<si...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Searching on codeplex doesn't seem like there are project called "Lucene":
>
>
> http://www.codeplex.com/site/search?query=Lucene&sortBy=Relevance&licenses=|&ac=3<http://www.codeplex.com/site/search?query=Lucene&sortBy=Relevance&licenses=%7C&ac=3>
>
> <
> http://www.codeplex.com/site/search?query=Lucene&sortBy=Relevance&licenses=|&ac=3<http://www.codeplex.com/site/search?query=Lucene&sortBy=Relevance&licenses=%7C&ac=3>
> >there
> is Luce*R*e if that's what you are referring to
>
> Simone
>
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 5:27 AM, George Aroush <ge...@aroush.net> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for letting us know. If that project takes off and proves itself,
> > that's great. There would not be a need for Lucene.Net.
> >
> > It seems to me the project over at codeplex.com is being called "Lucene"
> > --
> > IANAL, but I don't believe they can do so (or even use "Lucene.Net").
> > Someone need to check and advice the team.
> >
> > -- George
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Simone Chiaretta [mailto:simone.chiaretta@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:27 AM
> > To: lucene-net-user
> > Subject: Already some forks of Lucene.Net going on
> >
> > Seems like a few forks of Lucene.Net already started, with the intent to
> > make a full .NET version of Lucene.
> >
> > http://aimee.codeplex.com/
> > <http://aimee.codeplex.com/>http://lucere.codeplex.com/
> >
> > <http://lucere.codeplex.com/>This shows that having a real .NET API is
> > something that developers care about.
> >
> > Simone
> >
> > --
> > Simone Chiaretta
> > Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider
> > Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz
> > RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber
> > twitter: @simonech
> >
> > Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
> > "Life is short, play hard"
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Simone Chiaretta
> Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider
> Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz
> RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber
> twitter: @simonech
>
> Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
> "Life is short, play hard"
>
Re: Already some forks of Lucene.Net going on
Posted by Simone Chiaretta <si...@gmail.com>.
Searching on codeplex doesn't seem like there are project called "Lucene":
http://www.codeplex.com/site/search?query=Lucene&sortBy=Relevance&licenses=|&ac=3
<http://www.codeplex.com/site/search?query=Lucene&sortBy=Relevance&licenses=|&ac=3>there
is Luce*R*e if that's what you are referring to
Simone
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 5:27 AM, George Aroush <ge...@aroush.net> wrote:
> Thanks for letting us know. If that project takes off and proves itself,
> that's great. There would not be a need for Lucene.Net.
>
> It seems to me the project over at codeplex.com is being called "Lucene"
> --
> IANAL, but I don't believe they can do so (or even use "Lucene.Net").
> Someone need to check and advice the team.
>
> -- George
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simone Chiaretta [mailto:simone.chiaretta@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:27 AM
> To: lucene-net-user
> Subject: Already some forks of Lucene.Net going on
>
> Seems like a few forks of Lucene.Net already started, with the intent to
> make a full .NET version of Lucene.
>
> http://aimee.codeplex.com/
> <http://aimee.codeplex.com/>http://lucere.codeplex.com/
>
> <http://lucere.codeplex.com/>This shows that having a real .NET API is
> something that developers care about.
>
> Simone
>
> --
> Simone Chiaretta
> Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider
> Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz
> RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber
> twitter: @simonech
>
> Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
> "Life is short, play hard"
>
>
--
Simone Chiaretta
Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider
Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz
RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber
twitter: @simonech
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
"Life is short, play hard"
RE: Already some forks of Lucene.Net going on
Posted by George Aroush <ge...@aroush.net>.
Thanks for letting us know. If that project takes off and proves itself,
that's great. There would not be a need for Lucene.Net.
It seems to me the project over at codeplex.com is being called "Lucene" --
IANAL, but I don't believe they can do so (or even use "Lucene.Net").
Someone need to check and advice the team.
-- George
-----Original Message-----
From: Simone Chiaretta [mailto:simone.chiaretta@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 4:27 AM
To: lucene-net-user
Subject: Already some forks of Lucene.Net going on
Seems like a few forks of Lucene.Net already started, with the intent to
make a full .NET version of Lucene.
http://aimee.codeplex.com/
<http://aimee.codeplex.com/>http://lucere.codeplex.com/
<http://lucere.codeplex.com/>This shows that having a real .NET API is
something that developers care about.
Simone
--
Simone Chiaretta
Microsoft MVP ASP.NET - ASPInsider
Blog: http://codeclimber.net.nz
RSS: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/codeclimber
twitter: @simonech
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
"Life is short, play hard"