[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5228?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13944770#comment-13944770
 ] 

David Smiley commented on SOLR-5228:
------------------------------------

I like the idea of having a bona-fide schema, but it's not clear how to deal 
with custom extensions -- which I've done in custom coding.  If the schema 
defines the core but lets any other XML element be anywhere else for 
extensibility, it doesn't help the user that misnames or misplaces something.

> Deprecate <fields> and <types> tags in schema.xml
> -------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-5228
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5228
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Schema and Analysis
>            Reporter: Hoss Man
>            Assignee: Erick Erickson
>             Fix For: 4.8, 5.0
>
>         Attachments: SOLR-5228.patch, SOLR-5228.patch
>
>
> On the solr-user mailing list, Nutan recently mentioned spending days trying 
> to track down a problem that turned out to be because he had attempted to add 
> a {{<dynamicField .. />}} that was outside of the {{<fields>}} block in his 
> schema.xml -- Solr was just silently ignoring it.
> We have made improvements in other areas of config validation by generating 
> statup errors when tags/attributes are found that are not expected -- but in 
> this case i think we should just stop expecting/requiring that the 
> {{<fields>}} and {{<types>}} tags will be used to group these sorts of 
> things.  I think schema.xml parsing should just start ignoring them and only 
> care about finding the {{<field>}}, {{<dynamicField>}}, and {{<fieldType>}} 
> tags wherever they may be.
> If people want to keep using them, fine.  If people want to mix fieldTypes 
> and fields side by side (perhaps specify a fieldType, then list all the 
> fields using it) fine.  I don't see any value in forcing people to use them, 
> but we definitely shouldn't leave things the way they are with otherwise 
> perfectly valid field/type declarations being silently ignored.
> ---
> I'll take this on unless i see any objections.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to