[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6366?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14368027#comment-14368027
]
Hoss Man commented on LUCENE-6366:
----------------------------------
bq. Its not exactly obvious what they should be. keep in mind some languages
don't have ISO-639-1 or ISO-639-* at all (e.g. brazilian portuguese, sorani
kurdish) so adhering to that will just not work.
So let me rephrase/correct my question(s):
1) For languages which *do* have an ISO-639-1 code, should we "fix" the
existing java package names?
2) For languages which do *not* have an ISO-639-1 code, should we adopt &
document some sort of specific rule for how we namespace these sorts of things?
> "cz" (vs ISO langauge code "cs") for Czech analysis package?
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-6366
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6366
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Hoss Man
>
> As noted by Eduard Moraru on the solr-user mailing list, the sample
> fieldtypes Solr provides for dealing with the Czech use "cz" as a fieldType,
> dynamicField, and stopwords file naming convention -- but "cz" isn't the
> language code for Czech -- the correct langauge code is "cs".
> Solr's naming convention here comes directly from the lucene analysis package
> name for the Czech analysis classes: {{org.apache.lucene.analysis.cz;}} so
> before making any changes in the Solr sample configs (SOLR-7267), we should
> probably clarify if/why the lucene package name is like this.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
