OK. In the pull request, it would be nice if whoever submits or merges it
mentions all of the contributors to the patch in the commit message.

I asked Wolfgang H. about the SolrServer thing and this is what he told me:

Hi Mike, the class has been renamed to "SolrClient" (which unfortunately
> breaks compat). It's just a class rename. The functionality is the same as
> before. It was called SolrServer in Solr4 because it was a client proxy
> that sends RPCs to a Solr server, but calling it SolrClient is more
> straightforward to understand, hence the community decided to rename the
> class.
> It's possible to spawn an embedded Solr server, for example for testing
> purposes, via class EmbeddedSolrServer (a class that retains the same name
> in Solr7 and Solr4), which extends the SolrClient class.


Hope this helps,
Mike

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 4:41 AM, Wahrmann, Helmut <helmut.wahrm...@rsa.com>
wrote:

> Hi Mike,
>
> Thanks for the response. Would be cool if we get that sorted out.
>
> I've asked Yonghao Zou to submit the Pull Request, since he did most of
> the work and should get the credit.
> He'll  do so after the Chinese New Year's Eve.
>
> I will then issue a Pull request for the new ES Rest client, which is
> dependent on the above work.
>
> best regards,
> Helmut
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Percy [mailto:mpe...@apache.org]
> Sent: Dienstag, 13. Februar 2018 04:30
> To: dev@flume.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Merge of patch in Flume-3021?
>
> Hi Helmut,
> I see that I neglected to follow up on the other thread on this topic
> after your reply about SolrServer missing from the solrj jar. Let me ask
> around w/ some folks I know that work on Solr and see if there is any way
> to retain the SolrServer for our tests after upgrading to the new version.
>
> Thank you very much for working on upgrading Solr. Would you mind
> submitting a pull request with your (apparently work-in-progress) patch to
> upgrade both Solr and ES?
>
> To reply to your email in this thread, the JAR packaging situation is
> largely the same after merging FLUME-2957 so unfortunately most of what I
> noted in my reply in the other thread ( https://s.apache.org/GqcX ) still
> holds.
>
> I hope that we can upgrade the Solr dependencies as part of the same
> commit as the ES dependencies to avoid worrying about which lucene jar is
> first in the classpath, and ensure we are not adding any additional
> dependency conflicts to mvn dependency:tree.
>
> Regards,
> Mike
>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 12:54 AM, Wahrmann, Helmut <
> helmut.wahrm...@rsa.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > now that the blocker for FLUME-3021 is removed by committing
> > FLUME-2957, can we get the patch from 3021 merged to trunk?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Helmut
> >
>

Reply via email to