Thanks Cassandra and Jim,

I created a blocker issue for Solr 8.0 SOLR-12883
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12883>, currently in jira/http2
branch there are a draft-unmature implementation of SPNEGO authentication
which enough to makes the test pass, this implementation will be removed
when SOLR-12883 gets resolved . Therefore I don't see any problem on
merging jira/http2 to master branch in the next week.

On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 2:33 AM jim ferenczi <[email protected]> wrote:

> > But if you're working with a different assumption - that just the
> existence of the branch does not stop Dat from still merging his work and
> the work being included in 8.0 - then I agree, waiting for him to merge
> doesn't need to stop the creation of the branch.
>
> Yes that's my reasoning. This issue is a blocker so we won't release
> without it but we can work on the branch in the meantime and let other
> people work on new features that are not targeted to 8.
>
> Le mer. 17 oct. 2018 à 20:51, Cassandra Targett <[email protected]> a
> écrit :
>
>> OK - I was making an assumption that the timeline for the first 8.0 RC
>> would be ASAP after the branch is created.
>>
>> It's a common perception that making a branch freezes adding new features
>> to the release, perhaps in an unofficial way (more of a courtesy rather
>> than a rule). But if you're working with a different assumption - that just
>> the existence of the branch does not stop Dat from still merging his work
>> and the work being included in 8.0 - then I agree, waiting for him to merge
>> doesn't need to stop the creation of the branch.
>>
>> If, however, once the branch is there people object to Dat merging his
>> work because it's "too late", then the branch shouldn't be created yet
>> because we want to really try to clear that blocker for 8.0.
>>
>> Cassandra
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 12:13 PM jim ferenczi <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok thanks for answering.
>>>
>>> > - I think Solr needs a couple more weeks since the work Dat is doing
>>> isn't quite done yet.
>>>
>>> We can wait a few more weeks to create the branch but I don't think that
>>> one action (creating the branch) prevents the other (the work Dat is doing).
>>> HTTP/2 is one of the blocker for the release but it can be done in
>>> master and backported to the appropriate branch as any other feature ? We
>>> just need an issue with the blocker label to ensure that
>>> we don't miss it ;). Creating the branch early would also help in case
>>> you don't want to release all the work at once in 8.0.0.
>>> Next week was just a proposal, what I meant was soon because we target a
>>> release in a few months.
>>>
>>>
>>> Le mer. 17 oct. 2018 à 17:52, Cassandra Targett <[email protected]>
>>> a écrit :
>>>
>>>> IMO next week is a bit too soon for the branch - I think Solr needs a
>>>> couple more weeks since the work Dat is doing isn't quite done yet.
>>>>
>>>> Solr needs the HTTP/2 work Dat has been doing, and he told me yesterday
>>>> he feels it is nearly ready to be merged into master. However, it does
>>>> require a new release of Jetty to Solr is able to retain Kerberos
>>>> authentication support (Dat has been working with that team to help test
>>>> the changes Jetty needs to support Kerberos with HTTP/2). They should get
>>>> that release out soon, but we are dependent on them a little bit.
>>>>
>>>> He can hopefully reply with more details on his status and what else
>>>> needs to be done.
>>>>
>>>> Once Dat merges his work, IMO we should leave it in master for a little
>>>> bit. While he has been beasting and testing with Jenkins as he goes along,
>>>> I think it would be good to have all the regular master builds work on it
>>>> for a little bit also.
>>>>
>>>> Of the other blockers, the only other large-ish one is to fully remove
>>>> Trie* fields, which some of us also discussed yesterday and it seemed we
>>>> concluded that Solr isn't really ready to do that. The performance issues
>>>> with single value lookups are a major obstacle. It would be nice if someone
>>>> with a bit more experience with that could comment in the issue
>>>> (SOLR-12632) and/or unmark it as a blocker.
>>>>
>>>> Cassandra
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 8:38 AM Erick Erickson <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I find 9 open blockers for 8.0:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20SOLR%20AND%20priority%20%3D%20Blocker%20AND%20status%20%3D%20OPEN
>>>>>
>>>>> As David mentioned, many of the SOlr committers are at Activate, which
>>>>> ends Thursday so feedback (and work) may be a bit delayed.
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 8:11 AM David Smiley <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Hi,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Thanks for volunteering to do the 8.0 release Jim!
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Many of us are at the Activate Conference in Montreal.  We had a
>>>>> committers meeting where we discussed some of the blockers.  I think only 
>>>>> a
>>>>> couple items were raised.  I'll leave Dat to discuss the one on HTTP2.  On
>>>>> the Solr nested docs front, I articulated one and we mostly came to a
>>>>> decision on how to do it.  It's not "hard" just a matter of how to hook in
>>>>> some functionality so that it's user-friendly.  I'll file an issue for
>>>>> this.  Inexplicably I'm sheepish about marking issues "blocker" but I
>>>>> shouldn't be.  I'll file that issue and look at another issue or two that
>>>>> ought to be blockers.  Nothing is "hard" or tons of work that is in my
>>>>> sphere of work.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On the Lucene side, I will commit
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7875 RE MultiFields
>>>>> either late tonight or tomorrow when I have time.  It's ready to be
>>>>> committed; just sitting there.  It's a minor thing but important to make
>>>>> this change now before 8.0.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I personally plan to spend more time on the upcoming weeks on a few
>>>>> of these 8.0 things.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > ~ David
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 4:21 AM jim ferenczi <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Hi,
>>>>> >> We still have two blockers for the Lucene 8 release:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7075?jql=(project%3D%22Lucene%20-%20Core%22%20%20OR%20project%3DSOLR)%20AND%20priority%3DBlocker%20and%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20
>>>>> >> We're planning to work on these issues in the coming days, are
>>>>> there any other blockers (not in the list) on Solr side.
>>>>> >> Now that Lucene 7.5 is released I'd like to create a Lucene 8
>>>>> branch soon (next week for instance ? ). There are some work to do to make
>>>>> sure that all tests pass, add the new version...
>>>>> >> I can take care of it if there are no objections. Creating the
>>>>> branch in advance would help to stabilize this version (people can 
>>>>> continue
>>>>> to work on new features that are not targeted for 8.0) and
>>>>> >> we can discuss the best date for the release when all blockers are
>>>>> resolved. What do you think ?
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 à 11:32, Adrien Grand <[email protected]> a
>>>>> écrit :
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> Đạt, is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12639 the
>>>>> right issue for HTTP/2 support? Should we make it a blocker for 8.0?
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> Le lun. 3 sept. 2018 à 23:37, Adrien Grand <[email protected]> a
>>>>> écrit :
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> For the record here is the JIRA query for blockers that Erick
>>>>> referred to:
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12720?jql=(project%3D%22Lucene%20-%20Core%22%20%20OR%20project%3DSOLR)%20AND%20priority%3DBlocker%20and%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> Le lun. 3 sept. 2018 à 10:36, jim ferenczi <
>>>>> [email protected]> a écrit :
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Ok thanks Đạt and Erick. I'll follow the blockers on Jira.  Đạt
>>>>> do you have an issue opened for the HTTP/2 support ?
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Le ven. 31 août 2018 à 16:40, Erick Erickson <
>>>>> [email protected]> a écrit :
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> There's also the issue of what to do as far as removing Trie*
>>>>> support.
>>>>> >>>>>> I think there's a blocker JIRA.
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> project = SOLR AND priority = Blocker AND resolution =
>>>>> Unresolved
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> Shows 6 blockers
>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 4:12 AM Đạt Cao Mạnh <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> >>>>>> >
>>>>> >>>>>> > Hi Jim,
>>>>> >>>>>> >
>>>>> >>>>>> > I really want to introduce the support of HTTP/2 into Solr
>>>>> 8.0 (currently cooked in jira/http2 branch). The changes of that branch 
>>>>> are
>>>>> less than Star Burst effort and closer to be merged into master branch.
>>>>> >>>>>> >
>>>>> >>>>>> > Thanks!
>>>>> >>>>>> >
>>>>> >>>>>> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:55 PM jim ferenczi <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> >>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>>> >> Hi all,
>>>>> >>>>>> >> I'd like to get some feedback regarding the upcoming
>>>>> Lucene/Solr 8 release. There are still some cleanups and docs to add on 
>>>>> the
>>>>> Lucene side but it seems that all blockers are resolved.
>>>>> >>>>>> >> From a Solr perspective are there any important changes that
>>>>> need to be done or are we still good with the October target for the
>>>>> release ? Adrien mentioned the Star Burst effort some time ago, is it
>>>>> something that is planned for 8 ?
>>>>> >>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>>> >> Cheers,
>>>>> >>>>>> >> Jim
>>>>> >>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>>> >> Le mer. 1 août 2018 à 19:02, David Smiley <
>>>>> [email protected]> a écrit :
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>>>> >>> Yes, that new BKD/Points based code is definitely something
>>>>> we want in 8 or 7.5 -- it's a big deal.  I think it would also be awesome
>>>>> if we had highlighter that could use the Weight.matches() API -- again for
>>>>> either 7.5 or 8.  I'm working on this on the UnifiedHighlighter front and
>>>>> Alan from other aspects.
>>>>> >>>>>> >>> ~ David
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>>>> >>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:51 PM Adrien Grand <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> I was hoping that we would release some bits of this new
>>>>> support for geo shapes in 7.5 already. We are already very close to being
>>>>> able to index points, lines and polygons and query for intersection with 
>>>>> an
>>>>> envelope. It would be nice to add support for other relations (eg.
>>>>> disjoint) and queries (eg. polygon) but the current work looks already
>>>>> useful to me.
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> Le mer. 1 août 2018 à 17:00, Robert Muir <[email protected]>
>>>>> a écrit :
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> My only other suggestion is we may want to get Nick's
>>>>> shape stuff into
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> the sandbox module at least for 8.0 so that it can be
>>>>> tested out. I
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> think it looks like that wouldn't delay any October
>>>>> target though?
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:51 AM, Adrien Grand <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > I'd like to revive this thread now that these new
>>>>> optimizations for
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > collection of top docs are more usable and enabled by
>>>>> default in
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > IndexSearcher (
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8060). Any
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > feedback about starting to work towards releasing 8.0
>>>>> and targeting October
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > 2018?
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > Le jeu. 21 juin 2018 à 09:31, Adrien Grand <
>>>>> [email protected]> a écrit :
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> Hi Robert,
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> I agree we need to make it more usable before 8.0. I
>>>>> would also like to
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> improve ReqOptSumScorer (
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8204)
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> to leverage impacts so that queries that incorporate
>>>>> queries on feature
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> fields (
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8197) in an optional
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> clause are also fast.
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> Le jeu. 21 juin 2018 à 03:06, Robert Muir <
>>>>> [email protected]> a écrit :
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> How can the end user actually use the biggest new
>>>>> feature: impacts and
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> BMW? As far as I can tell, the issue to actually
>>>>> implement the
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> necessary API changes (IndexSearcher/TopDocs/etc) is
>>>>> still open and
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> unresolved, although there are some interesting ideas
>>>>> on it. This
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> seems like a really big missing piece, without a
>>>>> proper API, the stuff
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> is not really usable. I also can't imagine a
>>>>> situation where the API
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> could be introduced in a followup minor release
>>>>> because it would be
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> too invasive.
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 1:19 PM, Adrien Grand <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > Hi all,
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > I would like to start discussing releasing
>>>>> Lucene/Solr 8.0. Lucene 8
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > already
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > has some good changes around scoring, notably
>>>>> cleanups to
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > similarities[1][2][3], indexing of impacts[4], and
>>>>> an implementation of
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > Block-Max WAND[5] which, once combined, allow to
>>>>> run queries faster
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > when
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > total hit counts are not requested.
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > [1]
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8116
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > [2]
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8020
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > [3]
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8007
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > [4]
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4198
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > [5]
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8135
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > In terms of bug fixes, there is also a bad
>>>>> relevancy bug[6] which is
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > only in
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > 8.0 because it required a breaking change[7] to be
>>>>> implemented.
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > [6]
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8031
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > [7]
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8134
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > As usual, doing a new major release will also help
>>>>> age out old codecs,
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > which
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > in-turn make maintenance easier: 8.0 will no longer
>>>>> need to care about
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > the
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > fact that some codecs were initially implemented
>>>>> with a random-access
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > API
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > for doc values, that pre-7.0 indices encoded norms
>>>>> differently, or that
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > pre-6.2 indices could not record an index sort.
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > I also expect that we will come up with ideas of
>>>>> things to do for 8.0
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > as we
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > feel that the next major is getting closer. In
>>>>> terms of planning, I was
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > thinking that we could target something like
>>>>> october 2018, which would
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > be
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > 12-13 months after 7.0 and 3-4 months from now.
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > From a Solr perspective, the main change I'm aware
>>>>> of that would be
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > worth
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > releasing a new major is the Star Burst effort. Is
>>>>> it something we want
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > to
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > get in for 8.0?
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > Adrien
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> >>> --
>>>>> >>>>>> >>> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer,
>>>>> Author, Speaker
>>>>> >>>>>> >>> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
>>>>> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>> >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
>>>>> > LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
>>>>> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>>
>>>>>

Reply via email to