[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2167?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12905055#action_12905055
]
Steven Rowe commented on LUCENE-2167:
-------------------------------------
{quote}
By the way, I dont think you need to produce an explicit 3.x patch?
we should be able to svn merge without much trouble I think.
{quote}
Great, for some reason I thought you had said that backporting would require
lots of decisions, so I assumed it would require a separate patch.
That leaves documentation. I think I need a MIGRATE.txt entry, some
package-level documentation, and notes cross-referencing from
ClassicTokenizer/Analyzer to StandardTokenizer/Analyzer and vice-versa.
Anything else?
> Implement StandardTokenizer with the UAX#29 Standard
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-2167
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2167
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: contrib/analyzers
> Affects Versions: 3.1
> Reporter: Shyamal Prasad
> Assignee: Robert Muir
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: LUCENE-2167-jflex-tld-macro-gen.patch,
> LUCENE-2167-jflex-tld-macro-gen.patch, LUCENE-2167-jflex-tld-macro-gen.patch,
> LUCENE-2167-lucene-buildhelper-maven-plugin.patch,
> LUCENE-2167.benchmark.patch, LUCENE-2167.benchmark.patch,
> LUCENE-2167.benchmark.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch,
> LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch,
> LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch,
> LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch,
> LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, LUCENE-2167.patch, standard.zip,
> StandardTokenizerImpl.jflex
>
> Original Estimate: 0.5h
> Remaining Estimate: 0.5h
>
> It would be really nice for StandardTokenizer to adhere straight to the
> standard as much as we can with jflex. Then its name would actually make
> sense.
> Such a transition would involve renaming the old StandardTokenizer to
> EuropeanTokenizer, as its javadoc claims:
> bq. This should be a good tokenizer for most European-language documents
> The new StandardTokenizer could then say
> bq. This should be a good tokenizer for most languages.
> All the english/euro-centric stuff like the acronym/company/apostrophe stuff
> can stay with that EuropeanTokenizer, and it could be used by the european
> analyzers.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
