On Aug 10, 2009, at 3:06 PM, Michael Busch wrote:
I think we should change the backwards-compatibility policy as proposed in LUCENE-1698 and remove some deprecated things (inlcuding the old TokenStream API, maybe query parser) in 3.1, not 3.0.
Maybe. I'm not convinced yet that the current QP should go away either. The new QP sounds good and all paper, but from the looks of it at first glance, it is complicated (a whole package filled with classes just to implement the old QP versus a single JavaCC file and a single Java class), while the old one has been around for a long time and seen a lot of field use (and admittedly has warts), whereas both the new QP and the new Token stuff are essentially last minute additions to a last minor release right before we are about to do a major release and remove a whole bunch of deprecated APIs and essentially commit to these new ways of doing things without any field testing. And I haven't even mentioned the new per-segment stuff yet.
This is my reason for suggesting 2.5. It gives us some real running time before we have to commit to them. If I had to vote on 2.9 today in light of what it means for 3.0, it likely would be -1.
-Grant --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
