+0

I know I had voted +1 in the second vote, because I was happy about the fact that Lucene can release w/o Solr. But I spent more time thinking about this last weekend. I still don't really WANT this change, but can live with the current proposal. Hence, a +0 in this "official" vote summarizes probably more accurately how I feel about it.

Question: Is it sufficient to have more +1s than -1s for this vote to pass? I thought for votes as significant as this one a -1 veto is a showstopper?

 Michael

On 3/8/10 6:11 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
Apoligies in advance for calling yet another vote, but I just wanted
to make sure this was official.
Mike's second VOTE thread could probably technically stand on it's own
(since it included PMC votes), but given that I said in my previous
VOTE thread that I was just polling Lucene/Solr committers and would
call a second PMC vote, that may have acted to suppress PMC votes on
Mike's thread also.

Please vote for the proposal quoted below to merge lucene/solr development.
Here's my +1

-Yonik

Mike's call for a VOTE (amongst lucene/solr committers +11 to -1):
http://search.lucidimagination.com/search/document/a400ffe62ae21aca/vote_merge_the_development_of_solr_lucene_take_2#22d7cd086d9c5cf0
Subject: 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):

  * 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.

Reply via email to