Hi Garrett,
Thanks for your support.
No, the port of 1.4.0 and 1.4.3 of dotLucene is from the ground up and has nothing to do with Lucene.Net 1.3. The logs on SourceForge.net shows this.
Excellent. I'm glad to hear it.
The conflicting question that I have is, Lucene.Net is a better name then dotLucene. On SourceForge.Net we picked dotLucene because LuceneDotNet was taken (the previous developer, back then) So my choice is to call it Lucene.Net instead of dotLucene as it is more appropriate. In addition, the project, including namespace, is referred to as Lucene.Net -- only the distribution package is called dotLucene.
Any thoughts on Lucene.Net/dotLucene package name are welcome.
I don't have any opinion one way or the other on the name, but I will mention that I've always thought it was kind of odd to use something like 'Lucene.Net' as the internal namespace, the .Net portion seems rather redundant, given that you're talking about C# code it's rather obvious that it's .Net, why not simply place it in the Lucene namespace and save some typing?
-garrett
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
