On Apr 15, 2010, at 4:21 PM, Shai Erera wrote: > +1 on the Analyzers as well. > > Earwin, I think I don't mind if we introduce migrate() elsewhere rather than > on IW. What I meant to say is that if we stick w/ index format back-compat > and ongoing migration, then such a method would be useful on IW for customers > to call to ensure they're on the latest version. > But if the majority here agree w/ a standalone tool, then I'm ok if it sits > elsewhere. > > Grant, I'm all for 'just doing it and see what happens'. But I think we need > to at least decide what we're going to do so it's clear to everyone. Because > I'd like to know if I'm about to propose an index format change, whether I > need to build migration tool or not. Actually, I'd like to know if people > like Robert (basically those who have no problem to reindex and don't > understand the fuss around it) will want to change the index format - can I > count on them to be asked to provide such tool? That's to me a policy we > should decide on ... whatever the consequences.
As I said, we should strive for index compatibility, but even in the past, we said we did, but the implications weren't always clear. I think index compatibility is very important. I've seen plenty of times where reindexing is not possible. But even then, you still have the option of testing to find out whether you can update or not. If you can't update, then don't until you can figure out how to do it. FWIW, I think our approach is much more proactive than "see what happens". I'd argue, that in the past, our approach was "see what happens", only the "seeing" didn't happen until after the release! -Grant --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
