I would like to also include:
- LUCENE-1019: CustomScoreQuery should support multiple
ValueSourceQueries (ready, will commit soon)
- LUCENE 1081: Remove the "Experimental" warnings from
search.function package.
- Doron
Grant Ingersoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 06/12/2007 05:59:39:
>
> On Dec 5, 2007, at 9:49 PM, Michael Busch wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > we were talking about releasing Lucene 2.3 already some weeks ago, but
> > it seems that the list with issues targeted for 2.3 doesn't get
> > smaller.
> > Currently there are these 7 issues in the list:
> > - LUCENE-1061: Adding a factory to QueryParser to instantiate query
> > instances (Unassigned)
> > - LUCENE-1044: Behavior on hard power shutdown (Mike)
> > - LUCENE-1052: Add an "termInfosIndexDivisor" to IndexReader (Mike)
> > - LUCENE-1001: Add Payload retrieval to Spans (Grant)
>
> Moved to later.
>
> >
> > - LUCENE-1045: SortField.AUTO doesn't work with long (Grant)
>
> We need a decision here on how best to change this. We have two
> viable patches, one that keeps the status quo, more or less and one
> that changes FieldCache to be a class instead of an Interface and also
> removes FieldCacheImpl. It is NOT back-compat. but the feeling is
> (and I asked on user) that this change is acceptable. It would,
> however, require a recompile, as Yonik points out. Probably not a big
> deal either as long as we advertise this up front, but I don't feel
> comfortable making the decision (I am happy w/ either patch.) The
> change to class, I think makes more sense in the long run.
>
> I suppose the other alternative is to make the changes to the
> existing, as in the first patch, then deprecate ExtendedFieldCache and
> mark FieldCache such that it will be changed in 3.x to be a class,
> since that will require a recompile, presumably.
>
> Either way, once the decision is made, it is pretty trivial to make
> the appropriate changes.
>
> >
> > - LUCENE-1077: New Analysis Contributions (Grant)
>
> I will probably commit this in a day or two (I just uploaded a
> patch). It is all new functionality to provide various SinkTokenizer
> implementations and a few convenience classes for working with
> Payloads. Since these are additive, it shouldn't hold up the release.
>
>
> >
> > - LUCENE-1079: DocValues cleanup: constructor & getInnerArray()
> > (Doron)
> >
> > I think we all voted earlier this year to have more frequent releases
> > instead of very big ones. But I believe that this release has
> > already a
> > whole bunch of new features (e. g. DocumentsWriter, background merges,
> > IndexReader.reopen()), so I think we should stop adding more
> > features to
> > the 2.3 list (except bug fixes of course) and plan a bit ahead how
> > long
> > the above mentioned issues are going to take.
> >
> > So everyone on the list above: Could you give an estimate on when the
> > patches will be ready to commit? And are there issues on list that
> > shouldn't block 2.3? I think 1061 shouldn't block the release, because
> > nobody is assigned.
> >
> > Another question to everyone: Are there other issue that you really
> > want
> > to get into 2.3 that are not on the list?
> >
> > I'd like to get LUCENE-584 in, but I have to read through the recent
> > comments to figure out how much work is left. It should not block
> > 2.3 if
> > all other issues are resolved.
> >
> > I think a good target would be to complete all 2.3 issues by end of
> > this
> > year. Then we can start a code freeze beginning of next year, so that
> > we'll have 2.3 out hopefully by mid/end of January '08. I would
> > volunteer to act as the release manager again.
> >
> > Best,
> > -Michael
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
> --------------------------
> Grant Ingersoll
> http://lucene.grantingersoll.com
>
> Lucene Helpful Hints:
> http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/BasicsOfPerformance
> http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/LuceneFAQ
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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]
