> > I think the current state of logging only #lucene-dev is good. > > Yeah, except no one is on it other than a few people even though many of > them (committers that is) are on #lucene
I haven't seen any technical discussions anymore on #lucene. I was discussing with simon and mike on #lucene-dev the past days and had some work going on for the IndexUpgrader tool and MergePolicies. The discussions were even linked on JIRA issues. > > I go to #lucene-dev now. I think only IRC channel(s) that are Lucene/Solr > internal development in nature need to be logged -- and that's just #lucene- > dev. So just because you have observed many developers are on #lucene > instead of #lucene-dev doesn't indicate a problem, so long as no design > decisions for Lucene/Solr take place on #lucene or #solr. #lucene and #solr is > where users get to ask questions, much like how it is on the user mailing lists. > So *if* (I don't know if it happens) internal Lucene / Solr design decisions are > taking place on #lucene or #solr then obviously that must stop. I'd rather > these channels not get logged so that we can have an expectation of a single > place for these discussions on IRC and have that place be clear of user > support questions. > > > > RE refactoring / modularization, it's good to finally see a sense of > agreement on how to move forward. Yeah that ok, I have nothing to add to that (and don't want anymore, it's a soap opera). > >> 3. Put in the automated patch checking system that Hadoop uses. > Volunteers? Perhaps we can knock this out at Lucene Revolution? Who logs the stuff there? In my opinion, a meeting on Lucene-Rev is also "private" - or is this different somehow? What's difference between a private talk between two or three people in a bar at Lucene Revolution without somebody writing down a log? A log can also be written if somebody else talks with me in a private Skype chat! Uwe
