On Mar 4, 2010, at 6:26 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote: > > : Subject: [VOTE] Merge the development of Solr/Lucene (take 2) > : > : A new vote, that slightly changes proposal from last vote (adding only > : that Lucene can cut a release even if Solr doesn't): > > -1 > > I still don't like that we're voting on a "Goal"
I don't quite understand what you mean here. As I read it, the proposal from Michael is pretty specific on details. > > I still think that we should approach something like this iteratively and > incrementally -- preferably starting with some basic refactoring/merging > of specific components/modules (akin to McCandless'ss original suggestion) > and adjusting committers/mailinglists/build-processes however it makes > sense as we go along. I just don't see how specific components will work. Say we spin out analyzers but Solr doesn't move up to 3.0.x immediately. What incentive is there for a Solr committer to work on a new Analyzer in the Analyzers project as opposed to Solr? -Grant
