Hi Tristan it diverges quite a bit indeed, it's pretty much a complete rewrite of the whole thing. not sure a patch for 2.x is necessary though as it does not rely on segments
Thanks! Julien On 19 December 2012 00:29, Tristan Buckner <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Julien, > > Looking carefully, it seems that the 2.x branch diverges from what's in > trunk. Should I do two patches, one for trunk and one for 2.x? > > Tristan > > > On Dec 17, 2012, at 9:37 AM, Julien Nioche <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Something like NUTCH-$JIRA_ISSUE_NUMER_NutchversionNumber_revision.patch > maybe? > There conventions are not very strict on this :-) > > J. > > On 17 December 2012 16:41, Tristan Buckner <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Julien, >> >> Yes I can (once I get in). Ah ok I did not understand the naming >> conventions and thought each patch was just incrementing the last number. >> What should I call it? >> >> Tristan >> >> >> On Dec 17, 2012, at 6:15 AM, "Julien Nioche" < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi Tristan >> >> Can you open a new issue instead, mark it as an improvement and link to >> the original issue? BTW you patch name seems to contain '-2.1' but is for >> trunk which is misleading >> >> Thanks >> >> Julien >> >> On 14 December 2012 18:46, Tristan Buckner <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I added a patch to the already closed 1087 (replacement bash script for >>> the crawler command)). Can someone reopen and take a look? >>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NUTCH-1087 >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> * >> *Open Source Solutions for Text Engineering >> >> http://digitalpebble.blogspot.com/ >> http://www.digitalpebble.com >> http://twitter.com/digitalpebble >> >> > > > -- > * > *Open Source Solutions for Text Engineering > > http://digitalpebble.blogspot.com/ > http://www.digitalpebble.com > http://twitter.com/digitalpebble > > > -- * *Open Source Solutions for Text Engineering http://digitalpebble.blogspot.com/ http://www.digitalpebble.com http://twitter.com/digitalpebble
