I think going to 5 would be fine for our recommended and documented installation process - it has been out for most of the year. As long as its still possible for people to run Allura on solr 4 (or older). Which I think it would, since as you say, we aren't doing anything fancy. And I absolutely agree using an official image would be best. Kind of the point of this ticket :)
FYI, you may run into an issue with the "cat" field. We were testing internally on Solr 4.10.2 with the allura core xml files and got an error mentioning `<str name="field">cat</str>` and it says there is no field cat. We removed several fields from the xml file to get it to work. We also have config precendent (`solr.use_new_types`) for supporting multiple versions, if we do have code that needs to work differently on different versions. --- ** [tickets:#7907] Use standardized solr installation** **Status:** in-progress **Milestone:** unreleased **Labels:** sf-4 sf-current 42cc **Created:** Mon Jun 29, 2015 03:25 PM UTC by Dave Brondsema **Last Updated:** Wed Nov 11, 2015 03:48 PM UTC **Owner:** Igor Bondarenko We have a hacky setup for solr (both step-by-step and docker install): * we wget solr, instead of using a system package * we copy our schema into the solr example dir * we run `start.jar` directly instead of a service For docker, we should be able to use a solr image that somebody else has set up. For the step-by-step we should use system packages and perhaps borrow ideas from the solr container's Dockerfile. --- Sent from forge-allura.apache.org because dev@allura.apache.org is subscribed to https://forge-allura.apache.org/p/allura/tickets/ To unsubscribe from further messages, a project admin can change settings at https://forge-allura.apache.org/p/allura/admin/tickets/options. Or, if this is a mailing list, you can unsubscribe from the mailing list.
