On Sep 13, 2010, at 12:33 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko wrote:

> With the proper two-way open-source development process (taking and then 
> giving) I think it can become an important part of open-IR technologies, just 
> like what Lucene did to the search engines world. What ORP has to offer is of 
> great interest to HebMorph, an open-source project of mine trying to decide 
> on what is the best way to index and search Hebrew texts.
> 
> To this end I decided to put some of the development efforts of the HebMorph 
> project into making tools for the ORP. I have announced this before, but 
> unfortunately I had to attend to more pressing tasks before I could complete 
> this (and there was no response from the community anyway...). Just in case 
> you're interested in seeing what I came up with so far: 
> http://github.com/synhershko/Orev.

If you can, putting them up as a patch would be useful.  That way, we can show 
some progress.

> 
> IMHO, the ORP should stand by itself, and relate to Lucene/Solr only as its 
> basis framework for these initial stages. Perhaps also try to attract more 
> people who could find an interest in what it has to offer, so it can really 
> start growing.
> 
> Itamar.
> 
> On 12/9/2010 1:29 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>> On Sep 11, 2010, at 8:51 PM, Robert Muir wrote:
>> 
>>   
>>> i propose we take what we have and import into lucene-java's benchmark
>>> contrib.  it already has integration with wikipedia and reuters for perf
>>> purposes, and the quality package is actually there anyways.  later, maybe
>>> more people have time and contrib/benchmark evolves naturally... e.g. to
>>> modules/benchmark with solr support as a first big step.
>>>     
>> Yeah, that seems reasonable.  I have been thinking lately that it might be 
>> useful to pull our DocMaker stuff out separately from benchmark so that 
>> people have easy ways of generating content from things like Wikipedia, etc.
>> 
>> Still, at the end of the day, I like what ORP _could_ bring to the table and 
>> to some extent I think that is lost by folding it into Lucene benchmark.
>> 
>>   
>>> On Sep 11, 2010 7:33 PM, "Grant Ingersoll"<[email protected]>  wrote:
>>>     
>>>> Seems ORP isn't really catching on with people. I know personally I don't
>>>>       
>>> have the time I had hoped to have to get it going. At the same time, I
>>> really think it could be a good project. We've got some tools put together,
>>> but we still haven't done much about the bigger goal of a "self contained"
>>> evaluation.
>>>     
>>>> Any thoughts on how we should proceed with ORP?
>>>> 
>>>> -Grant
>>>>       
>> 
>> 
>>   

--------------------------
Grant Ingersoll
http://lucenerevolution.org Apache Lucene/Solr Conference, Boston Oct 7-8

Reply via email to