[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-826?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Matt Mitchell updated SOLR-826:
-------------------------------
Attachment: experiments.3.patch
Here is a version that supports http (standard ruby) and jruby (direct
connection) within the same interface. I'm trying my best to keep things as
simple as possible and staying away from extra dependencies.
I'm wondering, do we really need to support other response formats? If you
decide to set the wt to xml, then returning the raw xml should be good enough
right? What if someone wants to use Hpricot? What about REXML? If it's raw,
then you could use whatever you'd like. It might be better to let people decide
on how they'd like to handle alternate response formats? Thoughts?
> For the solr-ruby-refactoring movement
> --------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-826
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-826
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: clients - ruby - flare
> Reporter: Matt Mitchell
> Attachments: experiments.2.patch, experiments.3.patch,
> experiments.patch
>
>
> This is a patch to add a new directory to the solr-ruby-refactoring "branch".
> It's a very lightweight blob of code for connecting, selecting, updating and
> deleting using Ruby. It requires the URI and Net::HTTP libraries. No tests at
> the moment but I think the comments will do for now.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
