[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5952?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14140237#comment-14140237
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-5952:
---------------------------------------
Why is Version.write static? Version.read() is static like Version.parse()
because it creates a new Version, but write should write "this" as version?
In any case, I dont think a Format change is needed. To me this version number
is static like the codec header, what should you change?
An alternative would be to put both static methods into CodecUtils, but this
would also not help with changes in format.
> Give Version parsing exceptions more descriptive error messages
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-5952
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5952
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 4.10
> Reporter: Michael McCandless
> Assignee: Michael McCandless
> Priority: Blocker
> Fix For: 4.10.1, 5.0, 6.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-5952.patch, LUCENE-5952.patch, LUCENE-5952.patch,
> LUCENE-5952.patch, LUCENE-5952.patch, LUCENE-5952.patch
>
>
> As discussed on the dev list, it's spooky how Version.java tries to fully
> parse the incoming version string ... and then throw exceptions that lack
> details about what invalid value it received, which file contained the
> invalid value, etc.
> It also seems too low level to be checking versions (e.g. is not future proof
> for when 4.10 is passed a 5.x index by accident), and seems redundant with
> the codec headers we already have for checking versions?
> Should we just go back to lenient parsing?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
