Here it was in my original mail: Manifest-Version: 1.0 Ant-Version: Apache Ant 1.7.0 Created-By: 1.5.0_22-b03 (Sun Microsystems Inc.) Specification-Title: Lucene Search Engine Specification-Version: 3.0.0 Specification-Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation Implementation-Title: org.apache.lucene Implementation-Version: 3.0.0 883080 - 2009-11-22 15:52:49 Implementation-Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation X-Compile-Source-JDK: 1.5 X-Compile-Target-JDK: 1.5
In the impl version, it was 883080. ----- Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > -----Original Message----- > From: Andi Vajda [mailto:va...@osafoundation.org] > Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 7:00 PM > To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: RE: [VOTE] Release Apache Lucene Java 3.0.0 (take #2) > > > On Tue, 24 Nov 2009, Uwe Schindler wrote: > > > I will add the tag, when it is officially voted for release. If we > respin, > > the tag would be incorrect (and must be removed and recreated). The > release > > todo clearly says, that the tag should be added when all votes are > there, > > and all other did this like this before. > > > > Just one more day and I will create the tag (if I get 2 more votes). > > So I'm in a catch-22. I was going to vote if I could build a PyLucene from > this and pass all PyLucene tests :) > > Do you happen to know what svn rev was used to build the artifacts ? > I could use that rev instead of HEAD. > > Andi.. > > > > > Uwe > > > > ----- > > Uwe Schindler > > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > > http://www.thetaphi.de > > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Andi Vajda [mailto:va...@osafoundation.org] > >> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 6:46 PM > >> To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org > >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Lucene Java 3.0.0 (take #2) > >> > >> > >> Hi Uwe, > >> > >> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009, Uwe Schindler wrote: > >> > >>> I have built the artifacts for the final release of "Apache Lucene > Java > >>> 3.0.0" a second time, because of a bug in the TokenStream API (found > by > >> Shai > >>> Erera, who wanted to make "bad" things with addAttribute, breaking its > >>> behaviour, LUCENE-2088) and an improvement in NumericRangeQuery (to > >> prevent > >>> stack overflow, LUCENE-2087). They are targeted for release on 2009- > 11- > >> 25. > >>> > >>> The artifacts are here: > >>> http://people.apache.org/~uschindler/staging-area/lucene-3.0.0-take2/ > >> > >> The artifacts you've prepared don't correspond to the HEAD of the > >> lucene_3_0 branch anymore since fixes for bugs 2086 and 2092 were > added. > >> > >> Could you please add a lucene_3_0_0 tag that corresponds to the > artifacts > >> ? > >> This makes it easier to build a PyLucene with Lucene Java sources > >> equivalent > >> to these artifacts, using Lucene Java's svn. > >> > >> Of course, if another revision of these artifacts ends up being made, > the > >> tag should then move accordingly but, at this point, it's just missing. > >> > >> Thanks ! > >> > >> Andi.. > >> > >>> > >>> You find the changes in the corresponding sub folder. The SVN revision > >> is > >>> 883080, here the manifest with build system info: > >>> > >>> Manifest-Version: 1.0 > >>> Ant-Version: Apache Ant 1.7.0 > >>> Created-By: 1.5.0_22-b03 (Sun Microsystems Inc.) > >>> Specification-Title: Lucene Search Engine > >>> Specification-Version: 3.0.0 > >>> Specification-Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation > >>> Implementation-Title: org.apache.lucene > >>> Implementation-Version: 3.0.0 883080 - 2009-11-22 15:52:49 > >>> Implementation-Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation > >>> X-Compile-Source-JDK: 1.5 > >>> X-Compile-Target-JDK: 1.5 > >>> > >>> Please vote to officially release these artifacts as "Apache Lucene > Java > >>> 3.0.0". > >>> > >>> We need at least 3 binding (PMC) votes. > >>> > >>> Thanks everyone for all their hard work on this and I am very sorry > for > >>> requesting a vote again, but that's life! Thanks Shai for the pointer > to > >> the > >>> bug! > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Here is the proposed release note, please edit, if needed: > >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > >> -- > >>> > >>> Hello Lucene users, > >>> > >>> On behalf of the Lucene dev community (a growing community far larger > >> than > >>> just the committers) I would like to announce the release of Lucene > Java > >>> 3.0: > >>> > >>> The new version is mostly a cleanup release without any new features. > >> All > >>> deprecations targeted to be removed in version 3.0 were removed. If > you > >> are > >>> upgrading from version 2.9.1 of Lucene, you have to fix all > deprecation > >>> warnings in your code base to be able to recompile against this > version. > >>> > >>> This is the first Lucene release with Java 5 as a minimum requirement. > >> The > >>> API was cleaned up to make use of Java 5's generics, varargs, enums, > and > >>> autoboxing. New users of Lucene are advised to use this version for > new > >>> developments, because it has a clean, type safe new API. Upgrading > users > >> can > >>> now remove unnecessary casts and add generics to their code, too. If > you > >>> have not upgraded your installation to Java 5, please read the file > >>> JRE_VERSION_MIGRATION.txt (please note that this is not related to > >> Lucene > >>> 3.0, it will also happen with any previous release when you upgrade > your > >>> Java environment). > >>> > >>> Lucene 3.0 has some changes regarding compressed fields: 2.9 already > >>> deprecated compressed fields; support for them was removed now. Lucene > >> 3.0 > >>> is still able to read indexes with compressed fields, but as soon as > >> merges > >>> occur or the index is optimized, all compressed fields are > decompressed > >> and > >>> converted to Field.Store.YES. Because of this, indexes with compressed > >>> fields can suddenly get larger. > >>> > >>> While we generally try and maintain full backwards compatibility > between > >>> major versions, Lucene 3.0 has some minor breaks, mostly related to > >>> deprecation removal, pointed out in the 'Changes in backwards > >> compatibility > >>> policy' section of CHANGES.txt. Notable are: > >>> > >>> - IndexReader.open(Directory) now opens in read-only mode per default > >> (this > >>> method was deprecated because of that in 2.9). The same occurs to > >>> IndexSearcher. > >>> > >>> - Already started in 2.9, core TokenStreams are now made final to > >> enforce > >>> the decorator pattern. > >>> > >>> - If you interrupt an IndexWriter merge thread, IndexWriter now throws > >> an > >>> unchecked ThreadInterruptedException that extends RuntimeException and > >>> clears the interrupt status. > >>> > >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > >> -- > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Uwe > >>> > >>> > >>> ----- > >>> Uwe Schindler > >>> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > >>> http://www.thetaphi.de > >>> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> 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 > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
