option 3 looks best . But do we plan to remove anything we have not already marked as deprecated?
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Uwe Schindler <[email protected]> wrote: > We also had some (maybe helpful) opinions :-) > > ----- > Uwe Schindler > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > http://www.thetaphi.de > eMail: [email protected] > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Yonik >> Seeley >> Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 3:31 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: Solr 1.5 or 2.0? >> >> Oops... of course I meant to post this in solr-dev. >> >> -Yonik >> http://www.lucidimagination.com >> >> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Yonik Seeley >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > What should the next version of Solr be? >> > >> > Options: >> > - have a Solr 1.5 with a lucene 2.9.x >> > - have a Solr 1.5 with a lucene 3.x, with weaker back compat given all >> > of the removed lucene deprecations from 2.9->3.0 >> > - have a Solr 2.0 with a lucene 3.x >> > >> > -Yonik >> > http://www.lucidimagination.com >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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] > > -- ----------------------------------------------------- Noble Paul | Principal Engineer| AOL | http://aol.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
