On 12/05/2011, at 12:16 AM, "Granroth, Neal V." <neal.granr...@thermofisher.com> wrote:
> That's a fantasyland perceptive. In the real world there are many, huge > organizations (the clients to whom we sell various products, including one > optional package that incorporates Lucene.NET) who tie themselves to older > versions (Windows95 is the oldest in-production platform of which I'm aware). > The market is clearly demanding products and support for older systems. > > - Neal > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ryan Hoffman [mailto:rhoff...@tntp.org] > Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 6:20 PM > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] VOTE: .NET 2.0 Framework Support After Apache > Lucene.Net 2.9.4 > > I feel like if you're in an org that is limiting you to be on .NET2 / CLR2, > then guess what, you're stuck with the latest Lucene.NET for CLR2. Too bad. > That latest release obviously is working fine for you right now, otherwise > why did those business decisions make that a dependency in the first place. > You're also missing out on countless other libraries who have shifted to .NET > 4, which you are stuck on the latest CLR2 versions of. The rest of the world > has moved on, and guess what, we don't need to be held back because there are > a few people left behind. It is possible to maintain a v2 or even v3.5 branch. This could be supported as the community makes the effort. A few patches won't be 4 specific, majority I expect. If you want to take on managing this branch because your company demands it then put up your hand. It sounds like v4 offers advantages in performance and personally I need to go 4 for other projects anyway. Not supporting v4 would be frustrating from the simple iswhitespace function to full libraries
