+1
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > > On 03/04/2010 04:34 PM, Michael McCandless wrote: >> >> I forgot my vote: +1 >> >> Mike >> >> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:33 PM, Michael McCandless >> <luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> A new vote, that slightly changes proposal from last vote (adding only >>> that Lucene can cut a release even if Solr doesn't): >>> >>> * Merging the dev lists into a single list. >>> >>> * Merging committers. >>> >>> * When any change is committed (to a module that "belongs to" Solr or >>> to Lucene), all tests must pass. >>> >>> * Release details will be decided by dev community, but, Lucene may >>> release without Solr. >>> >>> * Modulariize the sources: pull things out of Lucene's core (break >>> out query parser, move all core queries& analyzers under their >>> contrib counterparts), pull things out of Solr's core (analyzers, >>> queries). >>> >>> These things would not change: >>> >>> * Besides modularizing (above), the source code would remain factored >>> into separate dirs/modules the way it is now. >>> >>> * Issue tracking remains separate (SOLR-XXX and LUCENE-XXX >>> issues). >>> >>> * User's lists remain separate. >>> >>> * Web sites remain separate. >>> >>> * Release artifacts/jars remain separate. >>> >>> Mike >>> >>> > > > -- > - Mark > > http://www.lucidimagination.com > > > >
