On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 5:42 AM, Michael McCandless <luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote: > I think it like the 1st option best (lucene moves as subdir to solr's > current trunk SVN path), but I don't feel strongly. > > This'd mean one could simply checkout lucene alone and do everything > you can do today. > > But if you check out solr, you also get a full checkout of lucene, and > solr's build.xml will go and build lucene, copy over its jars to its > lib folder, and then do everything it currently does. > > I think? > > This small step is not much change over what we have today -- the code > simply moves, unchanged, except for some fixes to solr's build.xml to > go and build its lucene subdir first.
Huh - I was leaning more toward putting solr under lucene because I thought that might be more acceptable to the lucene folks (actually, now lucene/solr folks) than vice-versa. But your points make perfect sense. > The bigger stuff, ideas on modules like renaming contrib->modules, > consolidating all analyzers, queries, queryparsers, highlighters, all > comes later. +1 -Yonik --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
