What about StopFilter (and LengthFilter) -- should we fix them before 3.1? Shai
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote: > I opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2954 > > ----- > Uwe Schindler > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > http://www.thetaphi.de > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Uwe Schindler [mailto:u...@thetaphi.de] > > Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 2:43 PM > > To: dev@lucene.apache.org > > Subject: RE: [VOTE] Lucene and Solr 3.1 release candidate > > > > Hi, > > > > I found a serious issue in CheckIndex.java (lines 357++): > > If you run CheckIndex on an index updated or changed with 3.1 it print > the > > following: > > > > 2011-03-08 14:38:56,373 INFO org.apache.lucene.index.CheckIndex - > > Segments file=segments_g19 numSegments=5 version=-11 [Lucene 1.3 or > > prior] > > > > Too stupid. We should check all other version numbers printed in > CheckIndex > > and fix accordingly. I know, Shaie added new versions in several other > files, > > too. I don't think we can provide this to users, as it will cause lot's > of JIRA > > issues complaining about that. > > > > Do we also need to fix the Solr' ConcurentLRUMap issue? Yonik? I provided > a > > patch this morning. > > > > Uwe > > > > ----- > > Uwe Schindler > > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > > http://www.thetaphi.de > > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Robert Muir [mailto:rcm...@gmail.com] > > > Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 7:33 AM > > > To: dev@lucene.apache.org > > > Subject: [VOTE] Lucene and Solr 3.1 release candidate > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I have posted a release candidate for both Lucene 3.1 and Solr 3.1, > > > both from revision 1078688 of > > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/dev/branches/lucene_solr_3_1/ > > > Thanks for all your help! Please test them and give your votes, the > > > tentative release date for both versions is Sunday, March 13th, 2011. > > > Only votes from Lucene PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to > > > check the release candidates and voice their approval or disapproval. > > > The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast. > > > > > > The release candidates are produced in parallel because in 2010 we > > > merged the development of Lucene and Solr in order to produce higher > > > quality releases. While we voted to reserve the right to release > > > Lucene by itself, in my opinion we should definitely try to avoid this > > > unless absolutely necessary, as it would ultimately cause more work > > > and complication: instead it would be far easier to just fix whatever > > > issues are discovered and respin both releases again. > > > > > > Because of this, I ask that you cast a single vote to cover both > > > releases. If the vote succeeds, both sets of artifacts can go their > > > separate ways to the different websites. > > > > > > Artifacts are located here: http://s.apache.org/solrcene31rc0 > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For > > > additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional > > commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
