On May 3, 2011, at 1:29 PM, Shai Erera wrote: > I don't like that approach. Two years from now, if indeed your vision becomes > the reality (obviously, not everyone think like you), what would o.a.solr > mean? Who will remember that 'suggest' (just picking an example) came from > Solr? Who'd care? > > Why, when I will integrate several modules together, will I need to see > o.a.lucene on some, and o.a.solr on others, when both come from the same > distro (even same tar.gz file, e.g. modules)? > > What makes sense, at least to me, is that either we call everything > o.a.lucene and solr becomes o.a.lucene.solr (I know I've probably pissed off > some people with that, sorry), or we come up w/ a new namespace (proposed by > Grant I think) o.a.lusolr. If we go with the second, then we'll have 3 > namespaces: > * o.a.lucene for core Lucene stuff (e.g. Lucene core, benchmark?) > * o.a.solr for pure/core Solr stuff > * o.a.lusolr for shared modules.
Honestly, I could go for any of those. I can't bring myself to get caught up caring long term what the package names are. You can't even make rules about that - they won't and shouldn't stand over time. > > Picking a good package name is important. And deciding to call everything > that came from Solr o.a.solr, just to not offend someone, is not the right > way to do things, at least IMO. Yeah, its just not a sustainable idea for an open source project anyway. > > Mike, I do share with you the vision you outline, and I believe many of us > do. It will become a reality if we factor out modules from Solr and Lucene > under /modules. It can also become a reality if someone simply contributes > under /modules alternative packages for e.g. faceting, suggest, spellcheck > etc. If those are good packages, I doubt "Solr" would be reluctant to adopt > them. > > Either way, it's the community that will dictate the future of itself, and > not individuals. Perhaps we should stop discussing what can possibly happen, > and start doing things. Actions get more results than endless threads. This > have been stated on this thread numerous times -- if a contribution is good, > well coded, designed, thought of, it will go in. Whether it's a refactoring > of something, or a completely new code. I doubt there are people on this > community that can stand in the way of it. This is really the crux of it. IMO, people should be much less concerned with how they perceive others, and more concerned with just doing things. The Apache rules are set up to deal with this type of thing. Those rules can get tricky, and nobody likes to fall back on them - but when you have strong disagreement, that is what they are there for. Not everyone on a project has to agree - nor do they have to have "pure open source" motives. That's just normal and expected. We are a very varied group. The more differences the better IMHO. Just as a reminder - a couple things I see repeatedly at Apache: "community over code" "merit does not expire" Other than that, the doers do, occasionally we vote, and in general things move along. > > Shai - Mark Miller lucidimagination.com Lucene/Solr User Conference May 25-26, San Francisco www.lucenerevolution.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
