I have no problem with new features either - but I would vote that if it requires new deprecations, it should wait.
I think its nice to have a clean release first. And I also don't think any of this features should hold up the 3.0 release. Lets get it out - then focus on new features. Grant Ingersoll wrote: > How do you handle deprecations of old stuff for the new contribution > (assuming it needs it)? Seems weird to have a major release that > immediately has deprecations. At the same time, it seems weird to > have a major release that doesn't contain new features. If anything, > it is our best opportunity to put in new stuff > > Traditionally, the only difference between .9 and .0 has been removal > of deprecations. This time around we are saying also JDK 1.5. > > Not saying we can't do it, just wondering. > > On Oct 30, 2009, at 3:31 PM, DM Smith wrote: > >> I don't see any reason to freeze new contributions from any release. >> >> On 10/30/2009 03:19 PM, Robert Muir wrote: >>> thanks Michael. >>> >>> does anyone else have any opinion on this issue? >>> fyi we already have several new features committed to 3.0 contrib >>> already (see contrib/CHANGES), >>> but I don't too much care either way, if I should not be adding this >>> feature to 3.0, I'd like to set the version in jira to 3.1 >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Michael McCandless >>> <luc...@mikemccandless.com <mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com>> wrote: >>> >>> I think we should allow new features into contrib for 3.0. >>> >>> I don't even like holding new features from core for 3.0. >>> >>> In general I don't think it's healthy when trunk is locked down.... >>> Trunk should be like a locomotive that's plowing ahead at all times. >>> >>> Mike >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> > Hi, >>> > >>> > What is the consensus on new features for contrib for Lucene >>> 3.0? I know >>> > that for core, its mostly a java 5 upgrade and deprecation >>> removal. >>> > >>> > I want to make sure LUCENE-1606 is set to the right version, >>> but I figured >>> > its really not just about that specific issue, I would like to >>> know the >>> > plans in general. >>> > >>> > Thanks, >>> > Robert >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Robert Muir >>> > rcm...@gmail.com <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com> >>> > >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >>> <mailto:java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >>> <mailto:java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Robert Muir >>> rcm...@gmail.com <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com> >> > > -- - Mark http://www.lucidimagination.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
