Hi, George,
I'd like to thank you for doing this port of Java Lucene.  We (Intuit)
are using it for the next release of a major desktop product, and I
myself have reviewed many 3rd party desktop search engines and
recommended Lucene for Intuit in the end.  Without your port we wouldn't
have been to use Lucene on the desktop as readily.

I will take this up to the management to dedicate some resources to
maintaining the .Net port.  We all want .Net Lucene to flourish.

On Mon, 2007-07-02 at 09:47 -0400, George Aroush wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> 
> It has been some time since I last posted to the Lucene.Net mailing
list.
> 
> I'm glad to see there is good activities and discussion going on from
the
> user base community, and judging from those post, I see some new
"faces".
> What's even better, I see folks are jumping in and answering questions
as
> well as helping out.
> 
> This is all well and great, but what Lucene.Net lacks is a development
> community.  As some of you know already, I'm the only active committer
to
> Lucene.Net.  This is bad in many ways.  It slows down releases
considerably,
> and it means Lucene.Net will never graduate from incubation to say the
> least.
> 
> For example, if you are following up on the Java Lucene mailing list,
you
> will noticed that about 2 weeks ago, Lucene 2.2 was released.  Here on
the
> Lucene.Net, we still haven't done any progress on Lucene.Net 2.1 since
my
> initial release going back to May 1st, 2007!  (see:
>
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-lucene-net-dev/200705
.mbo
> x/[EMAIL PROTECTED])
> 
> (I did get one important fix from DIGY, thanks DIGY -- but there is a
lot
> more to be done.)
> 
> So, if you are a developer (you have to be if you are a user) and want
to
> see Lucene.Net in par with Java Lucene, and really like Lucene.Net
such that
> you don't want to see it dying, consider spending few hours a week and
> helping with the port.  If you need any help from me to do so, or you
are
> not sure how to get started, please let me know.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -- George
> 

Reply via email to