You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by "Ishan Chattopadhyaya (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2015/11/25 05:55:10 UTC
[jira] [Comment Edited] (SOLR-8339) SolrDocument and
SolrInputDocument should have a common interface
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8339?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15026180#comment-15026180 ]
Ishan Chattopadhyaya edited comment on SOLR-8339 at 11/25/15 4:54 AM:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is there a historic reason for not having a common interface/abstract class for SolrDocument and SolrInputDocument other than a Map?
Since having this right now might break backcompat, does it make sense to do this for 6.0?
Right now, the motivation for doing this is SOLR-8220, but not strictly needed.
was (Author: ichattopadhyaya):
Is there a historic reason for not having a common interface/abstract class for SolrDocument and SolrInputDocument?
Since having this right now might break backcompat, does it make sense to do this for 6.0?
Right now, the motivation for doing this is SOLR-8220, but not strictly needed.
> SolrDocument and SolrInputDocument should have a common interface
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-8339
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8339
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Ishan Chattopadhyaya
>
> Currently, both share a Map interface (SOLR-928). However, there are many common methods like createField(), setField() etc. that should perhaps go into an interface/abstract class.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org