Porting all of the code in contrib is going to be a challenge; there is a lot of code in there. So it makes sense to first port packages that gives us the most value (maybe via a vote). Also, what's ported now may no longer work with 2.9.1's Lucene.Net port; this is because contrib.Net port has not been kept up to date. And yes, virtually every project in contrib has a JUnit test associated with it, thus it can be used for validation of a project port.
Regarding the .NET'es of ports, this has come up few times in the past, and it's tempting to want to make Lucene.Net more .NET'es. However. this is very hard to achieve without solid commitment and being at a commit-per-commit port with Lucene Java (i.e.: anytime a commit in Lucene Java happens, it must, within days, be ported over to Lucene.Net and committed). Many of the projects in contrib, the task to port them is much simpler than it is for the core Lucene code. However, here is where things get challenging. Any time you think about making a port more .NET'es, you must keep the following in mind: 1) It will be more work and harder to keep the code in sync with the Java version (per the above reasons), and 2) The code in contrib may no longer work with the code in Lucene core due to the .NET'es of the port (mainly public APIs). Thus, your effort at .NET'es of contrib port may be limited if Lucene core code isn't. What's the take away? Until when we can maintain commit-per-commit port with Lucene Java, trying to make Lucene.Net and / or contrib more .NET'es isn't realistic. -- George -----Original Message----- From: Eran Sevi [mailto:erans...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 3:12 PM To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: port of contrib packages from java Although some contrib packages might not be in use by any lucene .net user at the moment, I think we should port them all in accordance with the java version (it shouldn't be as hard as the core classes although I'm not sure there are any tests for them). When and if we'll diverge from the core java implementation in order to take benefit of .net and apply each patch as it comes, we can do the same for contrib which also sees much less traffic anyway. Eran On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Digy <digyd...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't know whether there is such a preference for contribs or not, but > diverging from Java makes life harder for further ports. > Will someone be able to easily port the next release after your state of > art work following .NET best practices? > Or a new port from scratch? > > DIGY > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP] [mailto:casper...@caspershouse.com] > Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 7:11 PM > To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: port of contrib packages from java > > On a somewhat related note, these ports, do they adhere to the > tenants applied to the main trunk, or can they better follow .NET best > practices if one wants to apply them? > > - Nick > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eran Sevi [mailto:erans...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 8:45 AM > To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: port of contrib packages from java > > Thanks, > I'm more into the "queries" package. > If no one will beat me to it, I hope I can help and add it myself. > > How did you do the port? manually or using some conversion tools? > > Eran. > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Roger Chapman <ro...@stormid.com> wrote: > > > I've done a first pass port of the Spatial Contrib project : > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-199 > > > > Roger. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Eran Sevi [mailto:erans...@gmail.com] > > Sent: 23 November 2009 13:17 > > To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org > > Subject: port of contrib packages from java > > > > Hi, > > Is there any thought to port all the contrib packages from java lucene > > after > > the porting of core 2.9.1 version is complete? > > Currently there are 23 packages in java contrib compared to only 7 > packages > > in .net contrib. > > > > Thanks, > > Eran. > > > >
