Just how 'experimental' is the SPI system at this point, if that's a reasonable question?
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Uwe Schindler <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Benson, > > the base factory class and the abstract Tokenizer, TpokenFilter and > CharFilter factory classes are all in Lucene's analyzers-commons module > (since 4.0). They are no longer part of Solr. > > Uwe > > ----- > Uwe Schindler > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > http://www.thetaphi.de > eMail: [email protected] > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Benson Margulies [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 12:41 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: Why is there a token filter factory abstraction but not a > tokenizer > > factory abstraction in Lucene? > > > > OK, so, here I go again making a public idiot of myself. Could it be > that the > > tokenizer factory is 'relatively recent' as in since 4.1? > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 7:39 AM, Benson Margulies > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > I'm working on tool that wants to construct analyzers 'at arms length' > > > -- a bit like from a solr schema -- so that multiple dueling analyzers > > > could be in their own class loaders at one time. I want to just define > > > a simple configuration for char filters, tokenizer, and token filter. > > > So it would be, well, convenient if there were a tokenizer factory at > > > the lucene level as there is a token filter factory. I can use Solr > > > easily enough for now, but I'd consider it cleaner if I could define > > > this entirely at the Lucene level. > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
