[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8621?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16732295#comment-16732295
]
Nicholas Knize edited comment on LUCENE-8621 at 1/2/19 6:33 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------------
+1
I can take this one. I vote:
# Move {{LatLonShape}} to {{core}} as a companion to {{LatLonPoint}}
# In a separate issue, refactor (or remove where appropriate) the two
remaining classes ( {{GeoRelationUtils}} && {{MortonEncoder}} ) from the
{{spatial}} module to either the {{core}} or {{spatial-extras module}}
# Remove the {{spatial}} module
We can do the refactor for 8.0 and keep it in sandbox for 7.7 leaving the 7.x
line consistent?
was (Author: nknize):
+1
I can take this one. I vote:
# Move {{LatLonShape}} to {{core}} as a companion to {{LatLonPoint}}
# In a separate issue, refactor (or remove where appropriate) the two
remaining classes ({{GeoRelationUtils && {{MortonEncoder)}}}} from the
{{spatial}} module to either the {{core}} or {{spatial-extras module}}
# Remove the {{spatial}} module
We can do the refactor for 8.0 and keep it in sandbox for 7.7 leaving the 7.x
line consistent?
> Move LatLonShape out of sandbox
> -------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-8621
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8621
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Adrien Grand
> Priority: Minor
>
> LatLonShape has matured a lot over the last months, I'd like to start
> thinking about moving it out of sandbox so that it doesn't stay there for too
> long like what happened to LatLonPoint. I am pretty happy with the current
> encoding. To my knowledge, we might just need to do a minor modification
> because of
> LUCENE-8620.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
