On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 16:43 -0500, "Robert Muir" <rcm...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote: > > Just to be clear, are you proposing to release 3.1 of Lucene, Solr, or > > both? > > Both: because our development is merged, I think it makes sense to > merge release engineering too. > > The users can be mostly unaware of this: for example the generated > artifacts are separate and posted on different websites. > But I think we should branch/tag/generate RC's and releases > together... I actually would propose we even have a single vote thread > for the combined releases. > I think this will result in higher quality releases because the 'whole > thing' is what is tested by hudson etc, not solr with an older copy of > lucene jar files. > > This is just my idea, if you are nervous about this speak up, we could > alternatively create two separate release branches (one for lucene, > one for solr) but I would really like to avoid this.
This is what I thought you meant, and certainly makes a lot of sense. Upayavira --- Enterprise Search Consultant at Sourcesense UK, Making Sense of Open Source --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
