Hi, The analysis factories are pure-Lucene code, please don't add any mbean stuff!
In fact it's enough to return names of parameters, the types are simple: always STRING, because it is a Map<String,String>. This may not be what you intend, but the internal representations of the types are casted in the constructor when the factory is created. Uwe ----- Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > -----Original Message----- > From: Alexandre Rafalovitch [mailto:arafa...@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2016 6:02 AM > To: dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Is "solr.AnalyzerName" expansion supposed to work for > Analyzers? > > I feel the total issue might be somewhat above my current code > understanding, but I would be happy to do the grunt work for the > factories to self-describe their parameters. I think that would be > useful in multiple ways. I was already looking at perhaps using MBean > describers for that, as that allows to specify types, acceptable > values, etc. > > Regards, > Alex. > ---- > Newsletter and resources for Solr beginners and intermediates: > http://www.solr-start.com/ > > > On 11 September 2016 at 00:12, Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > In addition this change (to "name" or "type" in the components) would > allow to remove Steve Rowe's hack in AbstractAnalysisFactory to keep the > class name in the parameter map for serializing, which is Solr specific and > should not be there! With the "official" names, this is no longer needed and > Solr could simple serialize the name. This hack hurted me several times > already! > > > > Uwe > > > > ----- > > 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: Saturday, September 10, 2016 6:54 PM > >> To: dev@lucene.apache.org > >> Subject: RE: Is "solr.AnalyzerName" expansion supposed to work for > >> Analyzers? > >> > >> Let's open an issue to do what I proposed! After that you could add the > >> schema editor GUI. > >> > >> I think Robert already proposed back at that time to add an additional > >> abstract method to each factory that returns the acceptable parameter > >> names. So one could select the component with help of SPI set. Once the > >> component was chosen the acceptable configuration parameters can be > >> retrieved from the instance. > >> > >> Uwe > >> > >> ----- > >> Uwe Schindler > >> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > >> http://www.thetaphi.de > >> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Upayavira [mailto:u...@odoko.co.uk] > >> > Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2016 5:21 PM > >> > To: dev@lucene.apache.org > >> > Subject: Re: Is "solr.AnalyzerName" expansion supposed to work for > >> > Analyzers? > >> > > >> > On Sat, 10 Sep 2016, at 04:03 PM, Uwe Schindler wrote: > >> > > To add, > >> > > > >> > > the manages schema really makes it easy to "rewrite". My plan would > be: > >> > > > >> > > - Add a new "type" or "name" attribute to schema.xml, which is > contrary > >> > > to "class" attribute usage > >> > > - When a manages schema is loaded, the resolving of classes using the > >> > > hack is done as it is now. Warnings are printed as said before. > >> > > - The managed schema is then changes to switch to the new attribute > >> > > (there is a getter to get the symbolic name from the factory, so > >> > > rewriting is easy) > >> > > > >> > > In addition, this simplifies usage: Some GUI could show a dropdown > list > >> > > for clicking together the analyzer. We just need to add a schema-REST > >> > > endpoint to get all names. > >> > > > >> > > Maybe open an issue targeted for 6.x / 7.0. I'd be happy to help to fix > >> > > this, although I could only do the SolrResourceLoader and SolrAnalyzer > >> > > stuff. > >> > > >> > Not knowing how to get a list of acceptable components was the thing > >> > that stopped me adding that part of the schema API to the admin UI. > And > >> > API to tell you which components exist would be extremely helpful. > >> > > >> > Upayavira > >> > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > 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 > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
