On Apr 26, 2011, at 6:32 PM, Michael Busch wrote: > Let's stop this passive-aggressive silliness and find a good solution.
We have got to do some of that or most of us would wonder what happened to everyone ;) I agree though. I think a *lot* of us are on this page. Probably though, others, like me, are at somewhat of a loss. I feel a lot like you do it seems - I come down in the middle. I like modules. I'm pro modules. But I think that Yonik brings up valid points that should be considered. I think features that are ready for Solr should go into Solr - if someone makes join a module for Lucene tomorrow - fantastic. I simply don't think we should require that to get it in now for Solr. I also think if anyone makes a module, its not going to just be blocked as I suppose some assume. I'd +1 any reasonable module like we know almost everyone here would. We all know this though. And the majority of us loosely agree from what I can tell. But what is the good solution? I don't really know. I don't think it's a de-merge. I don't think its a Solr is just sugar on Lucene and everything should by default be a module. I also think if someone actually makes something from Solr available in Lucene, I'd be for that. Patches welcomed and appreciated. What's the path forward? We have all made various suggestions in the past. What do they mean? How do we settle on something? Can we at least settle on the fact that we'd like to try and all work something out? Most of us would I think. It really seems to come down to robert/simon and yonik being really opposed here. This bubbles up every few weeks. I just don't know how to fix that - does anybody? I want to fix things as much as anyone - but what now? We have hashed everything over and over. - Mark Miller lucidimagination.com Lucene/Solr User Conference May 25-26, San Francisco www.lucenerevolution.org
