Here is my experience: The good:
I spent about 4 months in 2015 fixing bugs in 4.8, those were the days when unit tests had thousands of failures. Eventually got it down to under a hundred (in the core) and that part was rewarding. The code base is complex but that made the experience challenging in a good way: it was like having many puzzles to solve. The bad: The code base is complex :) The contribution curve is VERY steep. You need to spend a lot of time before you start to understand how bits move around and how things work. It's not easy. I think it's a hard project to contribute to. I reached a point where after fixing numerous bugs it got to the point of "same old, same old". The excitement was gone and I moved on to other endeavors. I still think I would have continued hacking away if I needed Lucene.net for a day to day job function. But I don't, using elasticsearch instead. I still get an itch from time to time to contribute here but it feels like what's left is minor stuff implementation wise (I could be wrong here) and again you can't just jump in for 5 mins here and there so who knows if I would really find time to do this. Site update and doc work is less appealing to somebody like me. On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 9:45 AM, Stefan Bodewig <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2018-01-12, Harold Harkema wrote: > > > I have an item for the Help Wanted list ;-) > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-598 > > Thank you, in particular for providing a test case. > > > We are really satisfied with the Lucene.Net 4.8. I was under the > > impression that the Lucene 4.8 port was almost finished. But I'm > > getting doubts when I see the current thread of emails. > > From my understanding the port is almost finished. > > We are all relying on Shad putting in a tremendous amount of time. As an > interested observer who doesn't even use Lucene.NET myself I was > wondering whether there is anything that can be done to get more people > involved. > > Stefan >
