On Mar 4, 2010, at 8:19 AM, Uwe Schindler wrote: > If we vote on what Mike says, I revise my vote and simply vote +/-0 to not > stop progress. I have some problem with the construct but in general I am > fine with merging dev lists, splitting into modules, merged committers - but > not the requirement on tests pass always. In my opinion, if anything changed > in lucene breaks some tests we could open an issue in solr.
I'm not sure why this is such a big deal to you, Uwe. Just as when tests break today w/in Lucene, say in a contrib module that you don't personally spend time on, other committers step up to help and get it fixed and you work with them to see it through. That's how the community works. Why should it be any different after this merge? No Lucene/Solr committer, upon seeing you broke something in Solr is going to let those things stay broken, just like how you and Michael worked to get all the new Analyzer stuff working in 2.9. I also suspect that you, being the conscientious developer you are, will either a) make sure someone w/ the appropriate expertise is made aware of it and work with them to fix it or b) you'll figure it out yourself and fix it too, thus adding to your skillset and making you a better developer. In fact, you've already done this on a number of occasions across the Lucene/Solr boundary as it is now (Trie fields, analyzers, etc.) -Grant
