Re: 8.5 release

Alan*, not Alas. On Sat, 7 Mar, 2020, 5:44 pm Ishan Chattopadhyaya, < ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > Alas, I've left a comment for you in > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9170. I leave it up to > your judgement whether it continues to be a blocker or can be > prioritized down.

Re: 8.5 release

Alas, I've left a comment for you in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9170. I leave it up to your judgement whether it continues to be a blocker or can be prioritized down. On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 10:59 PM Chris Hostetter wrote: > > > : I’ve created a branch for the 8.5 release

Re: Inconsistent query results in Lucene 8.1.0

Hi Phil, Please start new threads (emails) for new problems instead of replying to an existing one. The behavior of the existing thread does not result in an error; yours does, and so I think they are entirely dissimilar. Also, you'll need to dig deeper to learn what the particular error was

RE: Inconsistent query results in Lucene 8.1.0

We recently upgraded to our Drupal 8 sites to SOLR 8.3.1. We are now getting reports of certain patterns of search terms resulting in an error that reads, “The website encountered an unexpected error. Please try again later.” Below is a list of example terms that always result in this error

Re: Inconsistent query results in Lucene 8.1.0

> the two Blended queries get rewritten as Boolean queries themselves, with > each (modified) TermQuery as a SHOULD clause > the nested Boolean queries get flattened, since they are nested disjunctions > the Term queries (some of which are actually Boost queries) are deduplicated, > with one of

Re: Inconsistent query results in Lucene 8.1.0

So - I think you should open an issue. Can you determine whether flattening on its own would result in a bug? If not, then perhaps focus on the merging (deduplication) and whether it properly respects boosting? On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 10:50 AM Michele Palmia wrote: > > Hi all, > > I looked into

Re: 8.5 release

: I’ve created a branch for the 8.5 release (`branch_8_5`) and pushed it : to the apache repository. We’re now at feature freeze, so only bug : fixes should be pushed to the branch. I'm a little confused where folks should put stuff in CHANGES.txt right now if it's *NOT* something ready to

Re: CHANGES.txt and issue categorization

> Furthermore the message itself is often not code reviewed but should be. +1 to that point especially. I know on a few things I've worked on that once you get down in the weeds of the implementation, tests, etc. ... coming up with a good high-level "why might a user care" sentence can be tough.

Re: Inconsistent query results in Lucene 8.1.0

Hi all, I looked into this today. I can reproduce it and I believe it's a bug. This is caused by the following working together: - LUCENE-7386 Flatten nested disjunctions - LUCENE-7925

Re: Welcome Nhat Nguyen to the PMC

Welcome Nhat! Joel Bernstein http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 2:03 PM Nhat Nguyen wrote: > Thank you very much for the warm welcome! > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 10:59 AM Jan Høydahl wrote: > >> Welcome Nhat! >> >> Jan >> >> > 3. mar. 2020 kl. 17:34 skrev Adrien Grand : >>