What about the case where a "bug" is found that necessitates a file format
change.

Obviously this should be VERY rare given adequate testing, but it seems
difficult to make a hard and fast rule that X.0 should be able to ALWAYS
read X.N.


-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Cutting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 1:14 PM
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Taking a step back


Lucene version numbers are about compatibility.

Minor versions should always have complete API back-compatiblity.
That's to say, any code developed against X.0 should continue to run
without alteration against all X.N releases.  A major release may
introduce incompatible API changes.  The transition strategy is to
introduce new APIs in release X.N, deprecating old APIs, then remove all
deprecated APIs in release X+1.0.

File formats are back-compatible between major versions.  Version X.N
should be able to read indexes generated by any version after and
including version X-1.0, but may-or-may-not be able to read indexes
generated by version X-2.N.

Note that older releases are never guaranteed to be able to read indexes
generated by newer releases.  When this is attempted, a predictable
error should be generated.

Does that sound reasonable?

Doug

karl wettin wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-05-10 at 13:29 -0400, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>
>>Or even Lucene3Whiteboard (did I really write Lucene 3?!?)
>
>
> You know, I was just thinking that it would be nice if Lucene was
> developed like the Linux kernels. When 2.6 is stable, people are beta
> testing 2.7 and some hack 2.8.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to