[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2510?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13252194#comment-13252194
]
Chris Male edited comment on LUCENE-2510 at 4/12/12 4:45 AM:
-------------------------------------------------------------
{quote}
I guess my main problem with it is the generics (it returns Object).
Seems like the generics could be fixed so its parameterized to return ? extends
X.
If we add generics violations to the analyzers module, Uwe will not be happy
{quote}
+1
I thought along the same lines so we can definitely clean it up. Wouldn't want
to get a ticket from the policeman.
{quote}
Right I was just thinking really this stuff should be mostly in one place. I
think
its a little better now but there is some stuff in both places. I guess I can
let
that go, but it would be cool to have some sort of plan here, and if we don't
tackle
it, at least open up a followup issue since we are talking about an interface
here:
we won't be able to easy fix it without hard API breaks if we need.
{quote}
I'll think on it a bit and see if anybody else has any opinions. I agree that
we need to be extra careful here.
was (Author: cmale):
bq. I guess my main problem with it is the generics (it returns Object).
Seems like the generics could be fixed so its parameterized to return ? extends
X.
If we add generics violations to the analyzers module, Uwe will not be happy
+1
I thought along the same lines so we can definitely clean it up. Wouldn't want
to get a ticket from the policeman.
bq. Right I was just thinking really this stuff should be mostly in one place.
I think
its a little better now but there is some stuff in both places. I guess I can
let
that go, but it would be cool to have some sort of plan here, and if we don't
tackle
it, at least open up a followup issue since we are talking about an interface
here:
we won't be able to easy fix it without hard API breaks if we need.
I'll think on it a bit and see if anybody else has any opinions. I agree that
we need to be extra careful here.
> migrate solr analysis factories to analyzers module
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-2510
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2510
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: modules/analysis
> Affects Versions: 4.0
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Fix For: 4.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-2510.patch
>
>
> In LUCENE-2413 all TokenStreams were consolidated into the analyzers module.
> This is a good step, but I think the next step is to put the Solr factories
> into the analyzers module, too.
> This would make analyzers artifacts plugins to both lucene and solr, with
> benefits such as:
> * users could use the old analyzers module with solr, too. This is a good
> step to use real library versions instead of Version for backwards compat.
> * analyzers modules such as smartcn and icu, that aren't currently available
> to solr users due to large file sizes or dependencies, would be simple
> optional plugins to solr and easily available to users that want them.
> Rough sketch in this thread:
> http://www.lucidimagination.com/search/document/3465a0e55ba94d58/solr_and_analyzers_module
> Practically, I havent looked much and don't really have a plan for how this
> will work yet, so ideas are very welcome.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
