Jukka, thanks for your answer! I think we'll give it a try then. Best wishes, Martijn
> -----Original Message----- > From: Jukka Zitting [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 9:00 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Lucene 2.4.1 and jackrabbit-core-1.5.4 > > Hi, > > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 8:00 AM, Martijn Hendriks <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I've been looking at merging the patch for issue JCR-1855 to > jackrabbit-core-1.5.4 to > > get rid of a lucene memory leak, but for me that's not > straightforward. I noticed, > > however, that the core compiles and builds (including all tests) if > you only change > > the lucene dependency to 2.4.1. The patch of JCR-1855 contains a lot > of code that > > replaces depercated method calls. Is that all that happens? Is it > safe to only upgrade > > the version number and let the jackrabbit query code as it is? > > Marcel would know best, but he's currently otherwise occupied. > > AFAIK the main problem with upgrading to Lucene 2.4.x was the bug in > 2.4.0. The upgrade to 2.4.1 in revision 756442 seems to have been all > that was needed, and as you notice, revision 756444 looks more like > related cleanups. > > The query functionality is reasonably well covered by the test cases, > so if your backport passes all the tests then it's reasonably safe to > use as-is. > > BR, > > Jukka Zitting
