Erik Groeneveld <e...@cq2.nl> wrote: > But I admit that after the major > strategy change that involved using JCC instead of GCJ, I am switching > to a different GCJ solution. Probably other do so as well?
Nope. I dislike the JVM, particularly its handling of memory, so I share your pain, but the Lucene folks are moving to Java 1.5, and the gcj folks don't seem to be keeping up. The JCC-based approach seems to be robust (if you can stand sharing the Python process space with the JVM), and has a path to the future of Lucene. So I'm going to keep using JCC PyLucene with UpLib. Bill _______________________________________________ pylucene-dev mailing list pylucene-dev@osafoundation.org http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/pylucene-dev
