atom feed126 messages in org.apache.lucene.general[VOTE] merge lucene/solr development ...
FromSent OnAttachments
Yonik SeeleyMar 8, 2010 6:11 pm 
Mark MillerMar 8, 2010 6:18 pm 
Mattmann, Chris A (388J)Mar 8, 2010 6:22 pm 
Yonik SeeleyMar 8, 2010 6:23 pm 
Mattmann, Chris A (388J)Mar 8, 2010 6:32 pm 
Mark MillerMar 8, 2010 6:38 pm 
Michael BuschMar 8, 2010 6:49 pm 
Mattmann, Chris A (388J)Mar 8, 2010 6:50 pm 
Yonik SeeleyMar 8, 2010 6:52 pm 
Mark MillerMar 8, 2010 6:56 pm 
Mark MillerMar 8, 2010 6:58 pm 
Mattmann, Chris A (388J)Mar 8, 2010 7:02 pm 
Mattmann, Chris A (388J)Mar 8, 2010 7:16 pm 
patrick o'learyMar 8, 2010 7:16 pm 
Ian HolsmanMar 8, 2010 7:18 pm 
Mark MillerMar 8, 2010 7:28 pm 
Grant IngersollMar 8, 2010 8:24 pm 
Michael BuschMar 8, 2010 9:14 pm 
Mark MillerMar 8, 2010 9:26 pm 
Mattmann, Chris A (388J)Mar 8, 2010 9:33 pm 
Mark MillerMar 8, 2010 9:37 pm 
Mark MillerMar 8, 2010 9:40 pm 
Mark MillerMar 8, 2010 9:52 pm 
Dennis KubesMar 8, 2010 10:10 pm 
Ted DunningMar 8, 2010 10:46 pm 
Ted DunningMar 8, 2010 10:51 pm 
100 later messages
Subject:[VOTE] merge lucene/solr development (take 3)
From:Yonik Seeley (ysee@gmail.com)
Date:Mar 8, 2010 6:11:46 pm
List:org.apache.lucene.general

Apoligies in advance for calling yet another vote, but I just wanted to make sure this was official. Mike's second VOTE thread could probably technically stand on it's own (since it included PMC votes), but given that I said in my previous VOTE thread that I was just polling Lucene/Solr committers and would call a second PMC vote, that may have acted to suppress PMC votes on Mike's thread also.

Please vote for the proposal quoted below to merge lucene/solr development. Here's my +1

-Yonik

Mike's call for a VOTE (amongst lucene/solr committers +11 to -1): http://search.lucidimagination.com/search/document/a400ffe62ae21aca/vote_merge_the_development_of_solr_lucene_take_2#22d7cd086d9c5cf0

Subject: Merge the development of Solr/Lucene (take 2) A new vote, that slightly changes proposal from last vote (adding only that Lucene can cut a release even if Solr doesn't):

* Merging the dev lists into a single list.

* Merging committers.

* When any change is committed (to a module that "belongs to" Solr or to Lucene), all tests must pass.

* Release details will be decided by dev community, but, Lucene may release without Solr.

* Modulariize the sources: pull things out of Lucene's core (break out query parser, move all core queries & analyzers under their contrib counterparts), pull things out of Solr's core (analyzers, queries).

These things would not change:

* Besides modularizing (above), the source code would remain factored into separate dirs/modules the way it is now.

* Issue tracking remains separate (SOLR-XXX and LUCENE-XXX issues).

* User's lists remain separate.

* Web sites remain separate.

* Release artifacts/jars remain separate.