--
From:
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 6:54 PM
To:
Subject: RE: Proposal for simple LCF deployment model
So, Jack, let me see if I understand you. You wan to seet:
(1) Operation and configuration of LCF to look exactly like Solr, in that
the whole interaction with LCF is done via
From: ext Jack Krupansky [jack.krupan...@lucidimagination.com]
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 4:19 PM
To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Proposal for simple LCF deployment model
I meant the lcf.agents.RegisterOutput org.apache.lcf.agents.output.* an
Message-
From: ext Jack Krupansky [mailto:jack.krupan...@lucidimagination.com]
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 10:33 AM
To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Proposal for simple LCF deployment model
(b) The alternative starting point should probably autocreate the
database,
and shoul
t: Friday, May 28, 2010 10:33 AM
To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Proposal for simple LCF deployment model
> (b) The alternative starting point should probably autocreate the
> database,
> and should also autoregister all connectors. This will require a list,
> somewher
matter for
debate.
-- Jack Krupansky
--
From:
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 11:16 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Proposal for simple LCF deployment model
Dump and restore functionality already exists, but the format is not xml.
Providing and xml dump and re
t: Friday, May 28, 2010 10:33 AM
To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Proposal for simple LCF deployment model
> (b) The alternative starting point should probably autocreate the
> database,
> and should also autoregister all connectors. This will require a list,
> somewher
operation.
Karl
--- original message ---
From: "ext Jack Krupansky"
Subject: Re: Proposal for simple LCF deployment model
Date: May 28, 2010
Time: 10:33:34 AM
> (b) The alternative starting point should probably autocreate the
> database,
> and should also autoregister all con
Message-
From: ext Jack Krupansky [mailto:jack.krupan...@lucidimagination.com]
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 1:49 PM
To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Proposal for simple LCF deployment model
But for a basic, early evaluation, "test drive", just the file system
@lucidimagination.com]
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 1:49 PM
To: connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Proposal for simple LCF deployment model
But for a basic, early evaluation, "test drive", just the file system and
web repository connectors should be sufficient. And if ther
---
From:
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 11:10 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Proposal for simple LCF deployment model
You forget that building lcf in its entirety requires that you supply
proprietary client components from third-party vendors. So i think it is
unrealistic to expect canned builds tha
rid of the database requirement is also obviously not an option.
Karl
--- original message ---
From: "ext Jack Krupansky"
Subject: Re: Proposal for simple LCF deployment model
Date: May 28, 2010
Time: 10:42:17 AM
A simple deployment ala Solr is a good goal. Integrating Jetty wi
(b) The alternative starting point should probably autocreate the
database,
and should also autoregister all connectors. This will require a list,
somewhere,
of the connectors and authorities that are included, and their preferred
UI
names for that installation. This could come from the confi
A simple deployment ala Solr is a good goal. Integrating Jetty with the LCF
deployment will go a long way towards that goal. The database software
deployment (PostgreSQL) is the other half of the hassle with deploying LCF.
I think there are three distinct goals here: 1) A super-easy Solr-style
13 matches
Mail list logo
