On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Yonik Seeley <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Chris Hostetter > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> : See 3.0.2: http://s.apache.org/6kf >> : vs. 3.0.1: http://s.apache.org/t5 >> >> Ugh... ok, well i guess the precident has allready been set then. hope it >> doesn't bite us in the ass down the road. > > Here's an interesting one I remember from the past... a last minute > optimization: > http://search.lucidimagination.com/search/document/66bc5d5142a07c4/1_9_rc1 > > And due to that last minute optimization, a bug fix release followed > very shortly ;-) > http://search.lucidimagination.com/search/document/22d6566ceddf69ce/lucene_1_9_1_release_available I wouldn't wanna risk that though! I don't think the change is super critical but it would be nice for the folks using PMS to have this improvement. But I agree with Yonik that we should rather follow the pessimistic path especially if testing has already been done. When I talked to uwe earlier this week we thought we should backport and ask the community, if a fair bit of folks would have volunteered to test again I guess it would have been a good idea. Yet, we already have the artifact which have been tested so lets vote on those.
Thoughts? simon > -Yonik > http://www.lucidimagination.com >
