[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4399?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13469700#comment-13469700
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-4399:
-------------------------------------
I dont its a goal to check that they are really consistent? Really we can
remove this check.
I think every file should have its own name and version number. If XYZ writer
has 10 files, then
it should have 10 independent codec names and version numbers.
This was a bug in this stuff before (LUCENE-3621).
For the stored fields writer i'm not pedantic enough to go fix the fact it
shares version numbers,
but I'm just saying we really have to always look at this conceptually as a
per-file thing.
Otherwise we defeat a lot of the purpose of having a codec header at all
(verifying this file really
is what you think it is, and the version you think it is).
> Rename AppendingCodec to Appending40Codec
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4399
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4399
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Adrien Grand
> Assignee: Adrien Grand
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 4.1
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-4399.patch, LUCENE-4399.patch, LUCENE-4399.patch
>
>
> In order AppendingCodec to follow Lucene codecs version, I think its name
> should include a version number (so that, for example, if we get to releave
> Lucene 4.3 with a new Lucene43Codec, there will also be a new
> Appending43Codec).
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
