[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4173) Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13610867#comment-13610867 ] Commit Tag Bot commented on LUCENE-4173: [branch_4x commit] David Wayne Smiley http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1384028 LUCENE-4173 remove ignoreIncompatibleGeometry, fail unless given the exact shape needed Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys -- Key: LUCENE-4173 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173 Project: Lucene - Core Issue Type: Bug Components: modules/spatial Reporter: Chris Male Assignee: David Smiley Fix For: 4.0 Attachments: LUCENE-4173.patch, LUCENE-4173_remove_ignoreIncompatibleGeometry,_fail_when_given_the_exact_shape_needed.patch, LUCENE-4173_remove_IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry,_fail_when_given_the_exact_shape_needed.patch Silently not indexing anything for a Shape is not okay. Users should get an Exception and then they can decide how to proceed. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4173) Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13422878#comment-13422878 ] Chris Male commented on LUCENE-4173: I thought you were anti-degradation at indexing and querying? Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys -- Key: LUCENE-4173 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173 Project: Lucene - Core Issue Type: Bug Components: modules/spatial Reporter: Chris Male Attachments: LUCENE-4173.patch Silently not indexing anything for a Shape is not okay. Users should get an Exception and then they can decide how to proceed. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4173) Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13423058#comment-13423058 ] David Smiley commented on LUCENE-4173: -- Yeah I guess, I don't care that much about what the default is in this case. But do you like the idea? Some strategies are doing this already but without the proposed option to control it. Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys -- Key: LUCENE-4173 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173 Project: Lucene - Core Issue Type: Bug Components: modules/spatial Reporter: Chris Male Attachments: LUCENE-4173.patch Silently not indexing anything for a Shape is not okay. Users should get an Exception and then they can decide how to proceed. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4173) Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13423073#comment-13423073 ] Chris Male commented on LUCENE-4173: I do like it yeah. I think it improves 'simple' Strategies like TwoDoubles. I'm not sure we need to define it per query and actually I don't think it needs to be on the Strategy interface. Instead I think we should have it in the constructors of the appropriate Strategys. That way the consumer is forced to decide how they want to proceed at instantiation. Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys -- Key: LUCENE-4173 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173 Project: Lucene - Core Issue Type: Bug Components: modules/spatial Reporter: Chris Male Attachments: LUCENE-4173.patch Silently not indexing anything for a Shape is not okay. Users should get an Exception and then they can decide how to proceed. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4173) Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13423081#comment-13423081 ] David Smiley commented on LUCENE-4173: -- Okay, I'll press forward with a patch. I hope all these constructor arguments don't get out of control. The down-side to the constructor arguments is that it affects each subclass. And the constructor argument is just a true or false as a parameter, as opposed to the abundantly clear: strategy.setCoalesceIncompatibleGeometry(true). I know I concurred that the constructor choice makes it clear it's mandatory, but there are down sides. Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys -- Key: LUCENE-4173 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173 Project: Lucene - Core Issue Type: Bug Components: modules/spatial Reporter: Chris Male Assignee: David Smiley Attachments: LUCENE-4173.patch Silently not indexing anything for a Shape is not okay. Users should get an Exception and then they can decide how to proceed. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4173) Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13423083#comment-13423083 ] Chris Male commented on LUCENE-4173: Why dont we use an enum instead of a boolean? InvalidShape.COALESCE and InvalidShape.FAIL. Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys -- Key: LUCENE-4173 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173 Project: Lucene - Core Issue Type: Bug Components: modules/spatial Reporter: Chris Male Assignee: David Smiley Attachments: LUCENE-4173.patch Silently not indexing anything for a Shape is not okay. Users should get an Exception and then they can decide how to proceed. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4173) Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13423140#comment-13423140 ] David Smiley commented on LUCENE-4173: -- I was thinking this, yeah... and even though I wouldn't use it and would not support it being a default, InvalidShape.IGNORE -- haha full circle on the issue but I think the enum solves it. So default FAIL is your preference? Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys -- Key: LUCENE-4173 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173 Project: Lucene - Core Issue Type: Bug Components: modules/spatial Reporter: Chris Male Assignee: David Smiley Attachments: LUCENE-4173.patch Silently not indexing anything for a Shape is not okay. Users should get an Exception and then they can decide how to proceed. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4173) Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13422633#comment-13422633 ] David Smiley commented on LUCENE-4173: -- So we're definitely agreed ignoreIncompatibleGeometry should go away; great. But you know what would be good instead, I think? *coalesceIncompatibleGeometry*. If a strategy can only index points it will get the center point of the given shape. If the strategy can only index bounding boxes then it will index the bounding box of the given shape. Query time is similar. This could go for both index query. Some of the strategies are doing this already. Assuming we like the coalesceIncompatibleGeometry concept, is it true by default? I lean towards yes but I could go either way. And maybe SpatialArgs has the boolean independently so the client can indicate a different policy for query time? Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys -- Key: LUCENE-4173 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173 Project: Lucene - Core Issue Type: Bug Components: modules/spatial Reporter: Chris Male Attachments: LUCENE-4173.patch Silently not indexing anything for a Shape is not okay. Users should get an Exception and then they can decide how to proceed. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4173) Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13414847#comment-13414847 ] David Smiley commented on LUCENE-4173: -- bq. In addition the the class level javadoc, perhaps we can expand the package.html with some tables of Strategys vs. supported shapes and vs. supported operations. As long as we keep that up to date, it'll be a nice reference. +1 A comparison table in package.html is an awesome idea. bq. This still poses the question of what to do in a Strategy when given a Shape that is unsupported. Are you okay with the approach in the patch of just throwing the Exception? I am. +1. Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys -- Key: LUCENE-4173 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173 Project: Lucene - Java Issue Type: Bug Components: modules/spatial Reporter: Chris Male Attachments: LUCENE-4173.patch Silently not indexing anything for a Shape is not okay. Users should get an Exception and then they can decide how to proceed. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4173) Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13414853#comment-13414853 ] David Smiley commented on LUCENE-4173: -- Perhaps it would be useful to have an UnsupportedShapeException, extending from UnsupportedOperationException? We similarly have UnsupportedOperationException. This might be thrown from createIndexableFields() as well as one of the makeXXX query-time methods. Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys -- Key: LUCENE-4173 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173 Project: Lucene - Java Issue Type: Bug Components: modules/spatial Reporter: Chris Male Attachments: LUCENE-4173.patch Silently not indexing anything for a Shape is not okay. Users should get an Exception and then they can decide how to proceed. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4173) Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13414854#comment-13414854 ] Chris Male commented on LUCENE-4173: +1 Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys -- Key: LUCENE-4173 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173 Project: Lucene - Java Issue Type: Bug Components: modules/spatial Reporter: Chris Male Attachments: LUCENE-4173.patch Silently not indexing anything for a Shape is not okay. Users should get an Exception and then they can decide how to proceed. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4173) Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13414573#comment-13414573
]
David Smiley commented on LUCENE-4173:
--
bq. Is the idea to push the decision about whether to ignore or to throw an
Exception, to the consumer? I kind of like that.
Yeah, that's the inspiration. So if you wanted to demo shapes being indexed in
different ways with different strategies, you could implement
ignoreIncompatibleGeometry at the consumer level (e.g. Solr adapter) and not
have to catch an exception to find out, which would make me cringe.
bq. Why limit this to indexing?
Right, of course -- it should apply to a query shape too. And thinking along
these lines, perhaps this is also a way to advertise what SpatialOperation's
are supported?:
{code}
SpatialOperation[] getSupportedSpatialOperations()
{code}
Just an idea.
Having said all this, and even suggested these methods for consideration, I
don't think these informational meta methods are particularly useful because
about the only real use-case I can think of is the strategy demo, which is
so-so of a use-case, IMO, and consumer-level alternatives could be added. I
think Javadoc on the Strategy is fine and should be required *anyway* -- I
shouldn't have to write code or find the source to determine what operations
are supported. To that end, I will add some documentation to these Strategies
soon.
bq. Why allow Strategys to ignore Shapes at all?
I don't like it either. And I really don't like it automatically degrading
(e.g. convert circle to its bbox). -- just hand in the the bbox then, or make
the degrading configurable at the least so the user is very clear what's
happening.
Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
--
Key: LUCENE-4173
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173
Project: Lucene - Java
Issue Type: Bug
Components: modules/spatial
Reporter: Chris Male
Attachments: LUCENE-4173.patch
Silently not indexing anything for a Shape is not okay. Users should get an
Exception and then they can decide how to proceed.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4173) Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13414576#comment-13414576
]
Chris Male commented on LUCENE-4173:
{quote}
Having said all this, and even suggested these methods for consideration, I
don't think these informational meta methods are particularly useful because
about the only real use-case I can think of is the strategy demo, which is
so-so of a use-case, IMO, and consumer-level alternatives could be added. I
think Javadoc on the Strategy is fine and should be required anyway – I
shouldn't have to write code or find the source to determine what operations
are supported. To that end, I will add some documentation to these Strategies
soon.
{quote}
I agree. Documentation is really the only way we can convey all subtle
differences in the Strategys. In addition the the class level javadoc, perhaps
we can expand the package.html with some tables of Strategys vs. supported
shapes and vs. supported operations. As long as we keep that up to date, it'll
be a nice reference.
This still poses the question of what to do in a Strategy when given a Shape
that is unsupported. Are you okay with the approach in the patch of just
throwing the Exception?
{quote}
I don't like it either. And I really don't like it automatically degrading
(e.g. convert circle to its bbox). – just hand in the the bbox then, or make
the degrading configurable at the least so the user is very clear what's
happening.
{quote}
Yeah that is very reasonable. I think we need to encourage in documentation
that Strategys are much like analysis components, you need to consider which
you choose carefully, you need to understand what they do and you will need to
experiment.
Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
--
Key: LUCENE-4173
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173
Project: Lucene - Java
Issue Type: Bug
Components: modules/spatial
Reporter: Chris Male
Attachments: LUCENE-4173.patch
Silently not indexing anything for a Shape is not okay. Users should get an
Exception and then they can decide how to proceed.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4173) Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13413711#comment-13413711
]
David Smiley commented on LUCENE-4173:
--
Instead of this boolean flag on the strategy to ignore the shape, I propose the
Strategy more clearly declares which shapes it can index. Perhaps:
{code}
boolean canIndex(Shape);
{code}
or
{code}
ClassShape[] getIndexableShapes()
{code}
Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
--
Key: LUCENE-4173
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173
Project: Lucene - Java
Issue Type: Bug
Components: modules/spatial
Reporter: Chris Male
Attachments: LUCENE-4173.patch
Silently not indexing anything for a Shape is not okay. Users should get an
Exception and then they can decide how to proceed.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4173) Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13413733#comment-13413733 ] Chris Male commented on LUCENE-4173: I do quite like this idea. Couple of thoughts: - What would a user do with this information? If canIndex() returns false, so what? I can't see a situation where an API consumer would then cycle through alternative Strategys. Is the idea to push the decision about whether to ignore or to throw an Exception, to the consumer? I kind of like that. Except we're still going to have to either ignore or throw an Exception in createIndexFields() if the Strategy is given a bad Shape and I still believe ignoring is the bad choice. - Why limit this to indexing? Surely the same applies to filtering too. I don't really like the idea of a CONTAINS op when given a Point so I'm presented with the same issue, either ignore the Shape or throw an Exception. - Why allow Strategys to ignore Shapes at all? The Shape interface provides two fallback options when indexing or filtering. You can either use the Shape's bounding box or its centre point. No they might not be ideal, but if a Strategy can only support Rectangles or Points, then it can still index a Shape. We can then document that Strategys *must* index or filter any Shape, but can degrade if necessary. Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys -- Key: LUCENE-4173 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173 Project: Lucene - Java Issue Type: Bug Components: modules/spatial Reporter: Chris Male Attachments: LUCENE-4173.patch Silently not indexing anything for a Shape is not okay. Users should get an Exception and then they can decide how to proceed. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4173) Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13412825#comment-13412825 ] David Smiley commented on LUCENE-4173: -- +0. I am guessing that Ryan added this concept so that it would be easier to demonstrate easily index a variety of shapes in a variety of different ways, ignoring cases where some strategy doesn't handle some particular shape. But I think this feature if you could call it that, has dubious value otherwise. Clearly it does and should default to false so it won't harm anyone if they leave this alone. Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys -- Key: LUCENE-4173 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173 Project: Lucene - Java Issue Type: Bug Components: modules/spatial Reporter: Chris Male Attachments: LUCENE-4173.patch Silently not indexing anything for a Shape is not okay. Users should get an Exception and then they can decide how to proceed. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4173) Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13412997#comment-13412997 ] Ryan McKinley commented on LUCENE-4173: --- I'm fine removing it from the lucene strategies -- the motivation for this feature was to copy the same shape to multiple strategies and compare the behavior. this can be implemented at the solr level though... Remove IgnoreIncompatibleGeometry for SpatialStrategys -- Key: LUCENE-4173 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4173 Project: Lucene - Java Issue Type: Bug Components: modules/spatial Reporter: Chris Male Attachments: LUCENE-4173.patch Silently not indexing anything for a Shape is not okay. Users should get an Exception and then they can decide how to proceed. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
