I'll work on that And again - I would rather see a decent R# plugin to aid with Java code porting than an automated tool to do that
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 11:35 PM, Christopher Currens < [email protected]> wrote: > The entire asp.net codebase is released under the apache license, so I > wouldn't be surprised if MS would donate that under apache as well if we > asked. > On Oct 1, 2012 2:34 PM, "Prescott Nasser" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > There is already an Azure directory for Lucene.Net ( > > http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/windowsazure/Azure-Library-for-83562538) > > It would be fantastic to get that into contrib, but being by a microsoft > > guy, I think they stick to MS-LPL. Maybe we could reach out to them for > > that? > > The team is large, I think Luke.Net is probably too small for them imo, > > although it would be nice. ElasticSearch or work on sharpen porting would > > get my votes > > > Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 22:35:22 +0200 > > > Subject: Re: Offer of help vis Lucere project > > > From: [email protected] > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > > My thoughts exactly - either a search server on top of Lucene.NET > > > (I'd recommend looking at ElasticSearch as a role-model, not SOLR) , a > > > Java porting aid (a handy R# plugin would worth tons more in terms of > > > productivity than a tool that just translates code, as a dev should do > a > > > pass on the code anyway) , Luke.NET (WPF or Web-ish), or thinking of an > > > idea to a new missing contrib (Azure directory?) > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Troy Howard <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > All, > > > > > > > > You may recall a project I started called Lucere before getting > > directly > > > > involved with Lucene.Net. At that time I was planning to fork > > Lucene.Net, > > > > but since getting involved here that project has died off. I still > get > > > > occasional inquiries about the project via Codeproject, and I > generally > > > > point them to the Lucene.Net mailing lists. > > > > > > > > I just got an interesting email via that project, with an significant > > offer > > > > for development help. See below: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Lucere team, > > > > > > > > I am writing on behalf 12 students of AGH University of Science and > > > > Technology in Cracow, Poland. In starting fall semester we have > > project in > > > > our objective technologies course. This course is concentrated mainly > > on > > > > analysis and design of models (UMLs, objective principles and so on), > > but > > > > also on producing very high quality of code and using most common > > approach > > > > to development nowadays (design patterns, ORMs, unit testing, IoC and > > so > > > > on). We are looking for open source project to contribute. We think > > that we > > > > could desing and develop one or two specific parts of open project > like > > > > this as a part of our university project. Our team is full of very > > > > ambitious and very skilled people. Twelve people should be enough to > > build > > > > something great. Moreover we have support of our PhDs leading this > > course. > > > > They will validate all our ideas and will help us to design > everything > > in > > > > best way. > > > > > > > > As I said before we want to create rather entire module than fixing > > some > > > > bugs. Due to our course objectives we are interested only in highly > > > > objective modules. It would be great if you allow us free rein in > > designing > > > > such module. Maybe you have in your roadmap some features we can > build > > in > > > > that way. > > > > > > > > Your project seems very interesting for us and we would be delighted > to > > > > contribute. We are waiting eagerly for your response. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Bartlomiej Szczepanik > > > > Faculty of Computer Science, Electronics and Telecommunication > > > > AGH Univerity of Science and Technology, Cracow, Poland > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > If this is interesting to us, I will coordinate with Bartlomeij and > > see if > > > > we can bring these developers into Lucene.Net. If we do suddenly have > > 12 > > > > new developers that want to work on the project... What should they > > do, and > > > > how will we coordinate their work? > > > > > > > > His stated goals are to create not to bug fix... and porting doesn't > > really > > > > fall under the fold of "create and design". > > > > > > > > We have always tossed around the idea of creating a layer on top of > the > > > > existing API that would be more .NET idiomatic, or incorporating some > > new > > > > .NET specific features into the library *in addition* to the baseline > > > > functionality that we port directly. Perhaps this could be the group > > to do > > > > that work? > > > > > > > > We've also talked about trying to get some improvement with an > > automated > > > > porting process, and how that would require significant coding work > to > > > > bring a project like Sharpen up to our needs. Perhaps they could > focus > > on > > > > that? > > > > > > > > Maybe they could work on the distributed/federated search application > > that > > > > was brought up a while back? a SOLR-like project, that is unique to > > > > Lucene.Net (as opposed to porting SOLR or just bringing back the .NET > > > > remoteing model that was removed)? > > > > > > > > Perhaps they could design a new tool like Luke, that is more > > maintainable > > > > (have you seen that code? eek)... > > > > > > > > There are a lot of options here. Thoughts? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Troy > > > > > > >
