On Nov 9, 2005, at 6:19 AM, Erik Hatcher wrote:
If not, then our next release version should just be 2.0 and skip 1.9, don't ya think?
FWIW... One reason I haven't been persistent or hurried about the UTF-8-clean/speedup patches is because they aren't backwards compatible, and thus should not be considered prior to a 1.9 release. The other is that I suspect that given sufficient effort, byte-count Lucene strings will win out over char-chount Lucene strings -- we'll know after I tinker with the merge process and submit a diff. Again, I haven't been rushing -- I'm finishing up the Perl/C port of the org.apache.lucene.index package to familiarize myself with all the nooks and crannies first.
If you go directly to 2.0, when will the next opportunity be to introduce a backwards-compatibility-killing index format change?
Marvin Humphrey Rectangular Research http://www.rectangular.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
