I won't need an upgrade path. Just flush out zk and hdfs and all will be well? On Mar 16, 2013 2:18 PM, "Aaron McCurry" <[email protected]> wrote:
> The upgrade to Lucene 4 will cause the people running 0.1.4 or < issues > because of the custom directories in the older versions that are not > required in the newer version of Lucene. If there is a compelling reason to > create a converter so that upgrade will not require a reindex/reload I can > probably create one. > > Aaron > > > On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Garrett Barton <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > Sounds like a good list to me. Lucene 4 was the one I wad hoping for. :-) > > On Mar 16, 2013 2:10 PM, "Aaron McCurry" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > -Lucene 4.2 Upgrade > > > This is the big feature, but I spent a lot of time a few weeks ago > > > testing the resource management (InputIndex clones, Buffers, File GC, > > etc) > > > and geting it all working. So I feel really good about this code. > > > > > > -Automatic Slab configuration (Easy to integrate code) > > > This is simple but makes things easier to configure > > > > > > -Super Query Parser (Easy to integrate code) > > > This gives explicit control over the super queries > > > > > > There will probably be a couple of more things to add but most are > going > > to > > > be drop in replacements of existing code. > > > > > > Anything else that you can think of that would be good backport? > > > > > > Aaron > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Garrett Barton < > > [email protected] > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > I'd really like to see one as well. What features are you thinking of > > > > backporting? > > > > On Mar 16, 2013 2:01 PM, "Aaron McCurry" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Blur has been in the Apache incubator for 9 months and is long > > overdue > > > > for > > > > > a official Apache release. The 0.2 branch is far away from being > > able > > > to > > > > > be released. I was overly optimistic of how quickly of 0.2 could > be > > > > > feature complete. I know of a couple of projects that have > recently > > > > > upgrades from previous github versions of Blur to Apache Blur 0.1.4 > > > > > (compiled locally). > > > > > > > > > > I would like to create a 0.1.5 version bound for an Apache release > > and > > > > back > > > > > port a couple of pieces of code from 0.2 in order to modernize the > > > > > codebase. I would like to hear any thoughts on this idea, pros or > > > cons? > > > > I > > > > > really would like to create a release of Apache Blur in the next > few > > > > weeks. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > Aaron > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
