Re: forrest version?
Why Forrest? I think it's over-engineered for simple sites. The xdocs approach is so much easier to understand and use on a regular basis. See e.g. http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/logging/site/trunk/. Yoav On 1/30/06, Yonik Seeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sigh. When I deleted most of the stuff to get a barebones site, I'm back to the same error. I guess the next step is to build a devel version of forrest and hope it works (or hope for an understandable error message at least). -Yonik On 1/29/06, Yonik Seeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What version of forrest are people using to build nutch? I downloaded the prebuilt forrest 0.7, executed forrest.bat in nutch/src/site, and it failed (I used the .bat version, because the normal shell script failed even faster under cygwin). The error: X [0] linkmap.html BROKEN: No pipeline matc hed request: linkmap-linkmap.html Then I tried forrest.bat in forrest's own site-author, and that failed too. Last, I tried forrest.bat seed, then I tried to build that, and it worked! So that's what I'm starting from (and crossing my fingers). -Yonik -- Yoav Shapira System Design and Management Fellow MIT Sloan School of Management Cambridge, MA, USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] / www.yoavshapira.com
Re: forrest version?
I started with Forrest simply because Nutch and the top level Lucene use it. -Yonik On 1/30/06, Yoav Shapira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why Forrest? I think it's over-engineered for simple sites. The xdocs approach is so much easier to understand and use on a regular basis. See e.g. http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/logging/site/trunk/. Yoav On 1/30/06, Yonik Seeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sigh. When I deleted most of the stuff to get a barebones site, I'm back to the same error. I guess the next step is to build a devel version of forrest and hope it works (or hope for an understandable error message at least). -Yonik On 1/29/06, Yonik Seeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What version of forrest are people using to build nutch? I downloaded the prebuilt forrest 0.7, executed forrest.bat in nutch/src/site, and it failed (I used the .bat version, because the normal shell script failed even faster under cygwin). The error: X [0] linkmap.html BROKEN: No pipeline matc hed request: linkmap-linkmap.html Then I tried forrest.bat in forrest's own site-author, and that failed too. Last, I tried forrest.bat seed, then I tried to build that, and it worked! So that's what I'm starting from (and crossing my fingers). -Yonik -- Yoav Shapira System Design and Management Fellow MIT Sloan School of Management Cambridge, MA, USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] / www.yoavshapira.com
Re: forrest version?
Yoav Shapira wrote: OK, consistency is a good value. I still think it's more of a pain than it's worth, unless Nutch/Lucene are using Forrest features that can't be done far more simply. We could achieve the same look and feel via CSS skinning I'd imagine... But since I don't have much bandwidth to spend on this, I don't want to lobby too hard: if you're comfortable with Forrest for consistency's sake, that's cool. I thought that Forrest would be simpler, since we could just clone stuff in Nutch. I'm not in love with Forrest. If you think another way would be simpler yet, have at it. I don't think the look-and-feel do not need to match other projects too closely. For the record, I used forrest-0.6 on Nutch and Lucene TLP. Doug
Re: Things to do
Ian Holsman wrote: Doug mentioned that we could use the lucene 'zone' to get a working demo of Solr which I think we should start as soon as we can get a build going. We certainly could do this, but I'm not sure that we should. A real Solr demo will be read/write, and I'm not sure we want to support a read/write demo on lucene.zones.apache.org, with random folks on the internet able to write to it. What would be really cool to build on lucene.zones.apache.org using solr is a mail-archive search app. mail-archives.apache.org supports rss feeds for all mailing lists, so we could simply write a daemon that periodically polls the feed for each list and stuffs all new messages into a solr index. Doug
Re: svn commit: r373402 - in /incubator/solr/trunk/src/test/org: ./ apache/ apache/solr/ apache/solr/analysis/ apache/solr/analysis/TestSynonymFilter.java
Nutch is a Lucene sub-project, and it uses org.apache.nutch, not org.apache.lucene.nutch. I'd follow that for consistency's sake, until we see a problem. Otis - Original Message From: Yonik Seeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org Cc: solr-commits@lucene.apache.org Sent: Sun 29 Jan 2006 08:00:51 PM EST Subject: Re: svn commit: r373402 - in /incubator/solr/trunk/src/test/org: ./ apache/ apache/solr/ apache/solr/analysis/ apache/solr/analysis/TestSynonymFilter.java On 1/29/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Still need to rename the org.apache.lucene package classes to org.apache.solr (or do we want org.apache.lucene.solr?) Many of the things in the lucene package (FunctionQuery and SynonymFilter) could be moved to org.apache.solr, and renamed to org.apache.lucene if/when they officially become part of lucene. But the other reason for the org.apache.lucene package is for accessing package-protected lucene stuff. Currently there is just PublicFieldSortedHitQueue, but there was more when we used Lucene 1.4. Anyone have thoughts about that? Should the lucene package in solr go away? (after making FieldSortedHitQueue public, of course ;-) -Yonik
Re: svn commit: r373402 - in /incubator/solr/trunk/src/test/org: ./ apache/ apache/solr/ apache/solr/analysis/ apache/solr/analysis/TestSynonymFilter.java
Yonik Seeley wrote: Many of the things in the lucene package (FunctionQuery and SynonymFilter) could be moved to org.apache.solr, and renamed to org.apache.lucene if/when they officially become part of lucene. But the other reason for the org.apache.lucene package is for accessing package-protected lucene stuff. Currently there is just PublicFieldSortedHitQueue, but there was more when we used Lucene 1.4. Everything that's not required to be in a lucene package for access reasons should be in org.apache.solr. And we should try to fix Lucene so that nothing has to be in its packages. Doug
Re: solr home page
Hmmm, the c in Gospodnetic got messed up somewhere in the chain of things... I put it in the source xdoc as #263; and that worked in the local preview. That turned into C487 in the generated XML (which still looks fine if I point by browser at the local file). When it's served up by apache though, it doesn't work. Ideas? -Yonik On 1/30/06, Yonik Seeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Basic web site is up. http://incubator.apache.org/solr/ Built with Forrest 0.7, it grew on me after I got over the stumbling blocks. I discovered that forrest run also allows you to change the source documents and just hit reload in the browser... no need to rebuild to see the changes. -Yonik
