Nick, this change seems to be causing test failures. Can you have a look? See eg. https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-Solr-SmokeRelease-8.x/15/console.
On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 12:27 AM Nicholas Knize <nkn...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thank you Jim. LUCENE-8669 has been merged. > > - Nick > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 1:36 PM jim ferenczi <jim.feren...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Sure Nick, I am not aware of other blockers for 7.7 so I'll start the first >> RC when your patch is merged. >> Kevin, this looks like a big change so I am not sure if it's a good idea to >> rush this in for 8.0. Would it be safer to target another version in order >> to take some time to ensure that it's not breaking anything ? I guess that >> your concern is that a change like this should happen in a major version but >> I wonder if it's worth the risk. I don't know this part of the code and the >> implications of such a change so I let you decide what we should do here but >> let's not delay the release if we realize that this change requires more >> than a few days to be merged. >> >> Le mer. 30 janv. 2019 à 20:25, Nicholas Knize <nkn...@gmail.com> a écrit : >>> >>> Hey Jim, >>> >>> I just added https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8669 along with a >>> pretty straightforward patch. This is a critical one that I think needs to >>> be in for 7.7 and 8.0. Can I set this as a blocker? >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 1:07 PM Kevin Risden <kris...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> Jim, >>>> >>>> Since 7.7 needs to be released before 8.0 does that leave time to get >>>> SOLR-9515 - Hadoop 3 upgrade into 8.0? I have a PR updated and it is >>>> currently under review. >>>> >>>> Should I set the SOLR-9515 as a blocker for 8.0? I'm curious if others >>>> feel this should make it into 8.0 or not. >>>> >>>> Kevin Risden >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:15 AM jim ferenczi <jim.feren...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > I had to revert the version bump for 8.0 (8.1) on branch_8x because we >>>> > don't handle two concurrent releases in our tests >>>> > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8665). >>>> > Since we want to release 7.7 first I created the Jenkins job for this >>>> > version only and will build the first candidate for this version later >>>> > this week if there are no objection. >>>> > I'll restore the version bump for 8.0 when 7.7 is out. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Le mar. 29 janv. 2019 à 14:43, jim ferenczi <jim.feren...@gmail.com> a >>>> > écrit : >>>> >> >>>> >> Hi, >>>> >> Hearing no objection I created the branches for 8.0 and 7.7. I'll now >>>> >> create the Jenkins tasks for these versions, Uwe can you also add them >>>> >> to the Policeman's Jenkins job ? >>>> >> This also means that the feature freeze phase has started for both >>>> >> versions (7.7 and 8.0): >>>> >> >>>> >> No new features may be committed to the branch. >>>> >> Documentation patches, build patches and serious bug fixes may be >>>> >> committed to the branch. However, you should submit all patches you >>>> >> want to commit to Jira first to give others the chance to review and >>>> >> possibly vote against the patch. Keep in mind that it is our main >>>> >> intention to keep the branch as stable as possible. >>>> >> All patches that are intended for the branch should first be committed >>>> >> to the unstable branch, merged into the stable branch, and then into >>>> >> the current release branch. >>>> >> Normal unstable and stable branch development may continue as usual. >>>> >> However, if you plan to commit a big change to the unstable branch >>>> >> while the branch feature freeze is in effect, think twice: can't the >>>> >> addition wait a couple more days? Merges of bug fixes into the branch >>>> >> may become more difficult. >>>> >> Only Jira issues with Fix version "X.Y" and priority "Blocker" will >>>> >> delay a release candidate build. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> Thanks, >>>> >> Jim >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> Le lun. 28 janv. 2019 à 13:54, Tommaso Teofili >>>> >> <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com> a écrit : >>>> >>> >>>> >>> sure, thanks Jim! >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Tommaso >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Il giorno lun 28 gen 2019 alle ore 10:35 jim ferenczi >>>> >>> <jim.feren...@gmail.com> ha scritto: >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> > Go ahead Tommaso the branch is not created yet. >>>> >>> > The plan is to create the branches (7.7 and 8.0) tomorrow or >>>> >>> > wednesday and to announce the feature freeze the same day. >>>> >>> > For blocker issues that are still open this leaves another week to >>>> >>> > work on a patch and we can update the status at the end of the week >>>> >>> > in order to decide if we can start the first build candidate >>>> >>> > early next week. Would that work for you ? >>>> >>> > >>>> >>> > Le lun. 28 janv. 2019 à 10:19, Tommaso Teofili >>>> >>> > <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com> a écrit : >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> I'd like to backport >>>> >>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8659 >>>> >>> >> (upgrade to OpenNLP 1.9.1) to 8x branch, if there's still time. >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> Regards, >>>> >>> >> Tommaso >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> Il giorno lun 28 gen 2019 alle ore 07:59 Adrien Grand >>>> >>> >> <jpou...@gmail.com> ha scritto: >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > Hi Noble, >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > No it hasn't created yet. >>>> >>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 3:55 AM Noble Paul <noble.p...@gmail.com> >>>> >>> >> > wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >>> >> > > Is the branch already cut for 8.0? which is it? >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >>> >> > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 4:03 AM David Smiley >>>> >>> >> > > <david.w.smi...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > > >>>> >>> >> > > > I finally have a patch up for >>>> >>> >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12768 (already >>>> >>> >> > > > marked as 8.0 blocker) that I feel pretty good about. This >>>> >>> >> > > > provides a key part of the nested document support. >>>> >>> >> > > > I will work on some documentation for it this week -- >>>> >>> >> > > > SOLR-13129 >>>> >>> >> > > > >>>> >>> >> > > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 3:07 PM Jan Høydahl >>>> >>> >> > > > <jan....@cominvent.com> wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >> I don't think it is critical for this to be a blocker for >>>> >>> >> > > >> 8.0. If it gets fixed in 8.0.1 that's ok too, given this is >>>> >>> >> > > >> an ooold bug. >>>> >>> >> > > >> I think we should simply remove the buffering feature in the >>>> >>> >> > > >> UI and replace it with an error message popup or something. >>>> >>> >> > > >> I'll try to take a look next week. >>>> >>> >> > > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >> -- >>>> >>> >> > > >> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect >>>> >>> >> > > >> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com >>>> >>> >> > > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >> 25. jan. 2019 kl. 20:39 skrev Tomás Fernández Löbbe >>>> >>> >> > > >> <tomasflo...@gmail.com>: >>>> >>> >> > > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >> I think the UI is an important Solr feature. As long as >>>> >>> >> > > >> there is a reasonable time horizon for the issue being >>>> >>> >> > > >> resolved I'm +1 on making it a blocker. I'm not familiar >>>> >>> >> > > >> enough with the UI code to help either unfortunately. >>>> >>> >> > > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 11:24 AM Gus Heck >>>> >>> >> > > >> <gus.h...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>> It looks like someone tried to make it a blocker once >>>> >>> >> > > >>> before... And it's actually a duplicate of an earlier issue >>>> >>> >> > > >>> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9818). I guess >>>> >>> >> > > >>> its a question of whether or not overall quality has a >>>> >>> >> > > >>> bearing on the decision to release. As it turns out the >>>> >>> >> > > >>> screen shot I posted to the issue is less than half of the >>>> >>> >> > > >>> shards that eventually got created since there was an >>>> >>> >> > > >>> outstanding queue of requests still processing at the time. >>>> >>> >> > > >>> I'm now having to delete 50 or so cores, which luckily are >>>> >>> >> > > >>> small 100 Mb initial testing cores, not the 20GB cores >>>> >>> >> > > >>> we'll be testing on in the near future. It more or less >>>> >>> >> > > >>> makes it impossible to recommend the use of the admin UI >>>> >>> >> > > >>> for anything other than read only observation of the >>>> >>> >> > > >>> cluster. Now imagine someone leaves a browser window open >>>> >>> >> > > >>> and forgets about it rather than browsing away or closing >>>> >>> >> > > >>> the window, not knowing that it's silently pumping out >>>> >>> >> > > >>> requests after showing an error... would completely hose a >>>> >>> >> > > >>> node, and until they tracked down the source of the >>>> >>> >> > > >>> requests, (hope he didn't go home) it would be impossible >>>> >>> >> > > >>> to resolve... >>>> >>> >> > > >>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 1:25 PM Adrien Grand >>>> >>> >> > > >>> <jpou...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> Releasing a new major is very challenging on its own, I'd >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> rather not >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> call it a blocker and delay the release for it since this >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> isn't a new >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> regression in 8.0: it looks like a problem that has >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> affected Solr >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> since at least 6.3? I'm not familiar with the UI code at >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> all, but >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> maybe this is something that could get fixed before we >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> build a RC? >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 6:06 PM Gus Heck >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> <gus.h...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> > >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> > I'd like to suggest that >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10211 be >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> > promoted to block 8.0. I just got burned by it a second >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> > time. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> > >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 1:05 PM Uwe Schindler >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> > <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> Cool, >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> I am working on giving my best release time guess as >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> possible on the FOSDEM conference! >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> Uwe >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> ----- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> Uwe Schindler >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> http://www.thetaphi.de >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > -----Original Message----- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > From: Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2019 5:33 PM >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > To: Lucene Dev <dev@lucene.apache.org> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > Subject: Re: Lucene/Solr 8.0 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > +1 to release 7.7 and 8.0 in a row starting on the >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > week of February 4th. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 4:23 PM jim ferenczi >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <jim.feren...@gmail.com> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > > Hi, >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > > As we agreed some time ago I'd like to start on >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > > releasing 8.0. The branch is >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > already created so we can start the process anytime >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > now. Unless there are >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > objections I'd like to start the feature freeze next >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > week in order to build the >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > first candidate the week after. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > > We'll also need a 7.7 release but I think we can >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > > handle both with Alan so >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > the question now is whether we are ok to start the >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > release process or if there >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > are any blockers left ;). >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > > Le mar. 15 janv. 2019 à 11:35, Alan Woodward >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > > <romseyg...@gmail.com> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > a écrit : >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> I’ve started to work through the various >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> deprecations on the new master >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > branch. There are a lot of them, and I’m going to >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > need some assistance for >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > several of them, as it’s not entirely clear what to >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > do. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> I’ll open two overarching issues in JIRA, one for >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> lucene and one for Solr, >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > with lists of the deprecations that need to be >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > removed in each one. I’ll create >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > a shared branch on gitbox to work against, and push >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > the changes I’ve already >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > done there. We can then create individual JIRA >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > issues for any changes that >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > are more involved than just deleting code. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> All assistance gratefully received, particularly >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> for the Solr deprecations >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > where there’s a lot of code I’m unfamiliar with. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> On 8 Jan 2019, at 09:21, Alan Woodward >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> <romseyg...@gmail.com> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> I think the current plan is to do a 7.7 release at >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> the same time as 8.0, to >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > handle any last-minute deprecations etc. So let’s >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > keep those jobs enabled >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > for now. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> On 8 Jan 2019, at 09:10, Uwe Schindler >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> Hi, >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> I will start and add the branch_8x jobs to Jenkins >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> once I have some time >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > later today. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> The question: How to proceed with branch_7x? >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> Should we stop using it >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > and release 7.6.x only (so we would use branch_7_6 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > only for bugfixes), or >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > are we planning to one more Lucene/Solr 7.7? In the >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > latter case I would keep >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > the jenkins jobs enabled for a while. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> Uwe >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> ----- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> Uwe Schindler >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> http://www.thetaphi.de >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> From: Alan Woodward <romseyg...@gmail.com> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> Sent: Monday, January 7, 2019 11:30 AM >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> To: dev@lucene.apache.org >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> Subject: Re: Lucene/Solr 8.0 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> OK, Christmas caught up with me a bit… I’ve just >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> created a branch for 8x >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > from master, and am in the process of updating the >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > master branch to version >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > 9. New commits that should be included in the 8.0 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > release should also be >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > back-ported to branch_8x from master. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> This is not intended as a feature freeze, as I >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> know there are still some >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > things being worked on for 8.0; however, it should >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > let us clean up master by >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > removing as much deprecated code as possible, and >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > give us an idea of any >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > replacement work that needs to be done. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> On 19 Dec 2018, at 15:13, David Smiley >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> <david.w.smi...@gmail.com> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> January. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 2:04 AM S G >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> <sg.online.em...@gmail.com> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> It would be nice to see Solr 8 in January soon as >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> there is an enhancement >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > on nested-documents we are waiting to get our hands >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > on. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> Any idea when Solr 8 would be out ? >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> Thx >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> SG >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 1:34 PM David Smiley >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <david.w.smi...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> I see 10 JIRA issues matching this filter: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> project in (SOLR, LUCENE) AND >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > priority = Blocker and status = open and fixVersion = >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > "master (8.0)" >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> click here: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20in%20(SOLR%2C%20LU >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > CENE)%20AND%20priority%20%3D%20Blocker%20and%20status%20%3D%2 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > 0open%20and%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%22master%20(8.0)%22%20 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> Thru the end of the month, I intend to work on >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> those issues not yet >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > assigned. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 4:51 AM Adrien Grand >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> <jpou...@gmail.com> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> +1 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 10:38 AM Alan Woodward >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <romseyg...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> > >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> > Hi all, >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> > >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> > Now that 7.6 is out of the door (thanks Nick!) >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> > we should think about >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > cutting the 8.0 branch and moving master to 9.0. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > I’ll volunteer to create the >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > branch this week - say Wednesday? Then we should >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > have some time to >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > clean up the master branch and uncover anything that >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > still needs to be done >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > on 8.0 before we start the release process next year. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> > >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> > On 22 Oct 2018, at 18:12, Cassandra Targett >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> > <casstarg...@gmail.com> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> > >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> > I'm a bit delayed, but +1 on the 7.6 and 8.0 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> > plan from me too. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> > >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 7:18 AM Erick Erickson >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <erickerick...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> +1, this gives us all a chance to prioritize >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> getting the blockers out >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> of the way in a careful manner. >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 7:56 AM jim ferenczi >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> <jim.feren...@gmail.com> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> > >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> > +1 too. With this new perspective we could >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> > create the branch just >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > after the 7.6 release and target the 8.0 release for >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > January 2019 which gives >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > almost 3 month to finish the blockers ? >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> > >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> > Le jeu. 18 oct. 2018 à 23:56, David Smiley >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <david.w.smi...@gmail.com> a écrit : >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >> +1 to a 7.6 —lots of stuff in there >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 4:47 PM Nicholas >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >> Knize >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <nkn...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>> If we're planning to postpone cutting an >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>> 8.0 branch until a few >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > weeks from now then I'd like to propose (and >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > volunteer to RM) a 7.6 release >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > targeted for late November or early December >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > (following the typical 2 month >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > release pattern). It feels like this might give a >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > little breathing room for >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > finishing up 8.0 blockers? And looking at the change >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > log there appear to be a >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > healthy list of features, bug fixes, and improvements >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > to both Solr and Lucene >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > that warrant a 7.6 release? Personally I wouldn't >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > mind releasing the >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > LatLonShape encoding changes in LUCENE-8521 and >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > selective indexing work >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > done in LUCENE-8496. Any objections or thoughts? >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>> - Nick >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 5:32 AM Đạt Cao Mạnh >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <caomanhdat...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>> Thanks Cassandra and Jim, >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>> I created a blocker issue for Solr 8.0 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <jim.feren...@gmail.com> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <casstarg...@gmail.com> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <jim.feren...@gmail.com> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <casstarg...@gmail.com> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <erickerick...@gmail.com> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <david.w.smi...@gmail.com> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <jim.feren...@gmail.com> 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%3DBlocke >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > r%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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <jpou...@gmail.com> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <jpou...@gmail.com> 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%3DBlocke >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > r%20and%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>> Le lun. 3 sept. 2018 à 10:36, >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>> jim ferenczi >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <jim.feren...@gmail.com> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <erickerick...@gmail.com> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <caomanhdat...@gmail.com> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <jim.feren...@gmail.com> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <david.w.smi...@gmail.com> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <jpou...@gmail.com> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <rcm...@gmail.com> 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 <jpou...@gmail.com> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <jpou...@gmail.com> 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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > <rcm...@gmail.com> 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 <jpou...@gmail.com> 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: 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 >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> -- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> Lucene/Solr Search >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> Committer, Consultant, >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > Developer, Author, Speaker >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> LinkedIn: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > | Book: http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > - >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> For additional commands, >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> e-mail: dev- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > h...@lucene.apache.org >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > -- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > Lucene/Solr Search Committer, >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > Consultant, Developer, >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > Author, Speaker >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > LinkedIn: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > | Book: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > h...@lucene.apache.org >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>> -- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>> Nicholas Knize, Ph.D., GISP >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>> Geospatial Software Guy | Elasticsearch >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>> Apache Lucene Committer >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>> nkn...@apache.org >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >> -- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >> Developer, Author, >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > Speaker >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >> LinkedIn: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >> http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> > >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> -- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> Adrien >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> -- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> Lucene/Solr Search Committer (PMC), Developer, >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> Author, Speaker >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> Book: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> -- >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> Lucene/Solr Search Committer (PMC), Developer, >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> Author, Speaker >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > >> Book: >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >> > > > -- > > Nicholas Knize, Ph.D., GISP > Geospatial Software Guy | Elasticsearch > Apache Lucene PMC Member and Committer > nkn...@apache.org -- Adrien --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
