For selfish reasons I'd like to see the Azure Directory being improved, there has been a few requests on the Q&A http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/windowsazure/Azure-Library-for-83562538/view/ Discussions#content for the project to be open sourced
-----Original Message----- From: Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 01 October 2012 22:56 To: <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: Offer of help vis Lucere project +1 for an ElasticSearch like service (embed able and REST enabled) would get my vote. On Oct 1, 2012, at 5:34 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 >
