On Nov 24, 2009, at 9:07 AM, Colin Hynes wrote: > Just to toss in my two cents... > > I'd have to agree with Hoss here. In terms of versioning, I see no reason > that a major version bump in a dependency should cause a major version bump > in Solr - unless said bump causes major changes.
It's got some pretty big changes. > I haven't really looked at what's planned for Lucene 3.x yet, but if there > are some major api breaking changes coming, then perhaps the next couple 1.x > revisions should be taken to start cleaning up and preparing for a major > version bump. So, I would agree that, unless there's a really compelling > reason to switch to Lucene 3.x, it might be best let a little dust settle on > 2.9. I think we are going to want to support flexible indexing within a pretty reasonable time frame after it is available. Also note, there are some fairly big Solr changes in the pipeline at this point: 1. Spatial support, which will change/add some significant general purpose capabilities to Solr. 2. Significant new distributed capabilities for both indexing and searching 3. And of course a fair number of other things. Agreed, though, on the fact that we should cleanup in prep for 2.x, so we may want to shoot for a 1.9 first. -Grant
