Since the spatial contrib comes in two flavors (with and without NTS support), and each has dependencies on other nuget packages (the NTS version having multiple), I'd suggest we have a separate packages for it (Lucene.Spatial and Lucene.Spatial.NTS), even if the rest of the contribs are released as one package.
It makes the most sense, really. Once this is agreed upon I can prepare the nuspecs On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Christopher Currens < [email protected]> wrote: > Trunk is now up to date with all 3.0.3 changes. All work was being > done there, and not in the branch, so it made more sense (and was > considerably easier) to merge the changes into trunk instead of the > branch. We should probably delete the other 2 branches and create a > spinoff 3.0.3 branch when we've actually released for > bugfixes/changes. > > Also, I had a question about packaging. All of the build scripts and > projects have been updated to have the correct naming and include > spatial...however, the spatial libraries rely on spatial4n, but that > library is not included in any of the nuget packages, listed as an > external reference, or added as an embedded resource of the actual > library. I'm assuming this has to be done for them to work properly. > How should that be done? Included in the contrib and spatial.NTS > nuget packages or as an external nuget package reference? > > > Thanks, > Christopher > > On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Christopher Currens > <[email protected]> wrote: > > There are so few changes in the 3.0.3 branch that aren't present in > > trunk. From what I see, there are only three changesets. > > > > * Update version number in AssemblyInfo.cs changes for contrib projects > > * Update build scripts/projects with consistent names for contrib > projects > > * Cleaning and updated TXT files in the trunk. > > > > I think it would be easier to selectively merge those changes into > > trunk, instead of trying to merge trunk into the branch, especially > > considering that trunk is the latest version of 3.0.3, and not the > > branch. I'll work on this today and get this ready. I need to make > > sure that the scripts and projects merged correctly anyway, otherwise > > you're not going to be able to produce any build artifacts. > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Christopher Currens > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I created a branch from a revision that is pre-merge...I'm trying to > >> get a good clue of what is different between the two branches. > >> > >> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Prescott Nasser <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> careful with 3.0.3, it's still screwy from when I tried to merge > changes from the trunk into it. > >>> > >>>> Subject: svn commit: r1391054 - /lucene.net/branches/3.0.3-2/ > >>>> Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 15:20:42 +0000 > >>>> To: [email protected] > >>>> From: [email protected] > >>>> > >>>> Author: ccurrens > >>>> Date: Thu Sep 27 15:20:42 2012 > >>>> New Revision: 1391054 > >>>> > >>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1391054&view=rev > >>>> Log: (empty) > >>>> > >>>> Added: > >>>> lucene.net/branches/3.0.3-2/ (props changed) > >>>> - copied from r1383623, lucene.net/branches/3.0.3/ > >>>> > >>>> Propchange: lucene.net/branches/3.0.3-2/ > >>>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> --- svn:mergeinfo (added) > >>>> +++ svn:mergeinfo Thu Sep 27 15:20:42 2012 > >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ > >>>> +/incubator/ > lucene.net/branches/Lucene.Net.3.0.3/trunk:1199075-1294851* > >>>> +/incubator/lucene.net/trunk:1199072-1294798* > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >
