Search is a really complicated subject matter and I think it would be best to leave that part to the experts, e.g. The Java community who build & manage Lucene.
However, I do think that there is a place for a Lucene.Net Contrib project, where we as the .Net community can build on, and expand Lucene.Net, bringing all the great things that .Net has and filling in some of the blanks that are offered as part of a full blown search platform. A few example projects could be LINQ to Lucene Azure Directory A Lucene WCF Service Host for Indexing & searching NHibernate Search Entity Framework Search Mongo Search Facets Business Rules framework Better "Did you mean?" Add "Auto Correction" Cheers Glyn On 1 Nov 2010, at 11:30, Robert Jordan wrote: > On 01.11.2010 10:57, Ciaran Roarty wrote: >> I think Lucene.NET would benefit from being .NET aware and moving to a newer >> version of the Framework; I would be keen to get involved and do this. There >> was, however, a dominant view that it should mirror Lucene and this chase >> after another project was the main thing to achieve. My suspicion is that >> this approach has been taken because the Lucene.NET community is not >> defining new approaches to search; it was to get value out of the Lucene >> library. In effect, we could just use IKVM and get something similar. > > You're missing the point. Lucene.NET is "just" a port of Lucene > with a .NET-like API. The searching expertise is still there where it > belongs: to the main Lucene project. If you want "new approaches in > search" then you're looking at the wrong project. > >> Personally, I'd be up for trying to get the latest Lucene version we can ( >> i.e. take the current one ) and turn it into a real .NET version for >> Framework 4 or 3.5SP1 if required. I think if we identified the core of the > > I fail to see any need for .NET 4 or even .NET 3.5. There is only > one case where .NET 4 could be useful and a couple of other > cases for .NET 3.5. > > Not chasing .NET versions is definitely not the reason why > Lucene.NET is going back in incubation. > > The real reason was pointed out by DIGI: no one stepped out > for the "dully" work: prepare/publish official releases, > home page love, interact with the Board, etc. > >> I wouldn't want to be involved in a project that chased Lucene's tail >> forever. > > This is Lucene.NET's goal. > > Robert > Glyn Darkin Darkin Systems Ltd Mob: 07961815649 Fax: 08717145065 Web: www.darkinsystems.com Company No: 6173001 VAT No: 906350835
