Mea culpa ;) (on LUCENE-1781)
And I agree we need a better solution in general. I think not
deprecating new stuff until the .0 release is out seems best? I think
this .0 release is also especially challenging because we're (well,
Uwe and a few others -- thanks)'re taking advantage of 1.5's new
features. Hopefully, for 4.0, it'll be less work and faster
turnaround.
Mike
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Negative shcmegative :)
>
> Your right - this needs to be handled better. If we are going to add new
> deprecations before all of the old deprecations are removed, there needs
> to be help in the javadocs.
>
> Of course its nothing against those that did it - they likely didn't see
> this issue - I don't think any of us ever care about blame or fault.
> Just solutions ;) And this needs one.
>
> Robert Muir wrote:
>> I don't want to come across as negative here... i'm not trying to
>> single anyone out,
>> just a bit confused as to why my issue was singled out when theres
>> already been both new features and new deprecations added to 3.0,
>> and the issue in question doesnt even have any deprecations. then
>> again i don't really care if its in 3.0 or 3.1, but its just wierd.
>>
>> a search on 'deprecated' in contrib is pretty enlightening.
>>
>> here's an example from spatial: DistanceApproximation entire class
>> deprecated!
>>
>> * @deprecated This has been replaced with more accurate
>> * math in {...@link LLRect}.
>>
>> this deprecation traces back to LUCENE-1781, which is marked as Fix
>> Version 2.9
>> makes me want to delete it, except if you check contrib/CHANGES, you
>> see it wasn't actually applied until 3.0
>> so it shouldnt be deleted yet.
>>
>> again, not trying to be negative, +1 to both the contributor(s) and
>> committers that fixed this bug in spatial, as I sure don't understand it.
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com
>> <mailto:markrmil...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> What deprecations were already added?
>>
>> Robert Muir wrote:
>> > well, not to complain, but I will mention on this topic.
>> >
>> > If something is marked deprecated, its 10x easier if in the javadocs
>> > there is some version information applied.
>> >
>> > In the wild west that is contrib, its currently a bit difficult
>> for me
>> > to clear out the deprecations from 2.9, because there are new
>> > deprecations added in 3.0.
>> > it takes svn annotate + jira + CHANGES to figure out exactly what
>> > should be cleared out (and sometimes these all seem to disagree, Fix
>> > Version != Changes, etc etc)
>> >
>> > This is why i only did part of LUCENE-2022
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Mark Miller
>> <markrmil...@gmail.com <mailto:markrmil...@gmail.com>
>> > <mailto:markrmil...@gmail.com <mailto:markrmil...@gmail.com>>>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > 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>
>> <mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com <mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com>>
>> > <mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com
>> <mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com>
>> > <mailto: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>
>> <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com>>
>> > >>> <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com>
>> <mailto: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>
>> <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com>>
>> > <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com>
>> <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com>>>
>> > >>> >
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> >
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> > java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> <mailto:java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org>
>> > <mailto:java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> <mailto:java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org>>
>> > >>> <mailto:java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> <mailto:java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org>
>> > <mailto: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>
>> > <mailto:java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>> <mailto:java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org>>
>> > >>> <mailto:java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>> <mailto:java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org>
>> > <mailto:java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>> <mailto:java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org>>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> --
>> > >>> Robert Muir
>> > >>> rcm...@gmail.com <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com>
>> <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com>>
>> > <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com>
>> <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com>>>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > - Mark
>> >
>> > http://www.lucidimagination.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> <mailto:java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org>
>> > <mailto: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>
>> > <mailto:java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>> <mailto:java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Robert Muir
>> > rcm...@gmail.com <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com>
>> <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com <mailto:rcm...@gmail.com>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> - Mark
>>
>> http://www.lucidimagination.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
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
