On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think a 4.0.1 would be strange at all.

I just think it would be strange since there aren't really any serious
bugs yet in the lucene CHANGES.txt? I also don't think there has been
enough time for anyone to actually find any bugs, its only been like 6
days since we released.

>
> 4.X is essentially trunk to me now. I would put in changes that I want
> to bake for future 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, etc changes.

Sure, well there aren't many architectural changes yet since 4.0, and
currently we have the ability to make and bake large changes to lucene
in many cases (block postings format, compressed stored fields, etc)
without introducing risk, since they are just experimental until we
decide to fold them into the default.

But personally as soon I hit some limit in the codec API (which I
expect will happen), or want to work on something biggish like
positions iterators, I'll be looking at doing that kind of breaking
change only in trunk.

I just think we shouldn't hold back from that: we should develop in a
correct and safe way and not backport scary stuff or majorly break
APIs to get them out faster, instead 4.x should stay stable and we
should plan on 5.x being in our own lifetimes.

i dont want there to be the assumption that 5.0 is 3 years out.

>
> When you have bad bugs, you don't want to worry about what's baking -
> you just want to put out a bug fix release.
>

I totally agree with this! But I have serious concerns about the
ability for this community to say "hey we fixed some nasty shit, lets
get a bugfix out ASAP". Nobody is really testing until release
candidates are issued, the 72-hour voting period designed to be fair
to devs in different timezones is bastardized as some iterative QA
cycle, etc etc.

So if we are going to go thru all the trouble, I'd rather it be a 4.1

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Reply via email to