Re: Lucene/Solr 6.0.0 Release Branch

I just want to clarify you(Nick) / our expectations about this release branch. It seems, based on issues I've seen like LUCENE-7072, that we can commit to the release branch without your permission as RM. If this is true, then I presume the tacit approval is okay so long as it's not a new

Re: Copyrights

and makes changes to those files. Presumably we're fine, but some > people might feel a little strange assigning copyright back to a unknown > company instead of licensing use to the ASF. > > Mike > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 3:19 PM, david.w.smi...@gmail.com < > david.w.smi.

Copyrights

I'm considering doing some enhancements to Lucene/Solr on behalf of another organization/entity who wants me to include copyright statements to them. Same ASLv2 license. This is no big deal; right? I see we've already got some source files with non-ASF copyright licenses (e.g. Automata.java and

Re: Master branch and java version

Me too; minutes after your notice Alan. Thanks for the FYI. On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 5:18 AM Varun Thacker wrote: > I also ran into the same problem. I was using 1.8.0_31 . Upgrading worked > though. > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 3:19 AM, Alan Woodward

Re: Lucene/Solr 6.0.0 Release Branch

I consider https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7056 (a little spatail3d reshuffling) blocker before 6.0 as it's the ideal time to move things around / rename. But I don't mind doing an extra cherry pick in the end if you want to go create the branch without waiting. So I don't know if

Re: ZK Connection Failure leads to stale data

Both sound very good to me, Dennis. Thanks. On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 11:55 AM Dennis Gove wrote: > Just wanted to take a moment to get anyone's thoughts on the following > issues > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8599 >

Re: [JENKINS-EA] Lucene-Solr-trunk-Linux (32bit/jdk-9-ea+104) - Build # 15822 - Still Failing!

LOL On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 4:43 AM Uwe Schindler wrote: > LOL. If compact string wouldn't have been disabled, I would say: Compact > String comprumpted(TM) the version :-) > > - > Uwe Schindler > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen > http://www.thetaphi.de > eMail:

Re: What is the story for AdminUI for 5.x vs 6.0?

+1 to Erick's sentiment. 6.0 new UI. On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 10:02 PM Erick Erickson wrote: > My vote is +1 for 6.0 defaulting to the new admin UI. Whatever remains > undone, it's time to move to the new version and fix whatever crops > up. > > Maybe just leave a link

Re: git commits on JIRA issues;

e's random work branches is crazy. > > - Mark > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 3:09 PM david.w.smi...@gmail.com < > david.w.smi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Ok thanks. It's too bad it's not going to be changed. IMO, I don't >> these extra commit notifications are h

Re: git commits on JIRA issues;

discussion of our theories on how to fix it should happen on the issue. On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 3:42 PM david.w.smi...@gmail.com < david.w.smi...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 I'll do it. > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 3:29 PM Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Yeah man,

Re: Naming branches so that life is easier

Establishing conventions and adhering to them would be good. Some observations I have with your example: you suggested a hypothetical branch named "dweiss/jira3826". IMO that branch name isn't a great name because it is ambiguous with respect to it being for Lucene or Solr. Most of our

Re: git commits on JIRA issues;

Right; I can't imagine any of us actually trying to merge master to branch_whatever. We cherry-pick. Nobody has dissented on that to my knowledge. ~ David On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:19 PM Ryan Ernst wrote: > > Are you sure *all* back porting will be done by cherry picking? > >

Re: git commits on JIRA issues;

e it was not). >> >> Two years ago at ApacheCon I attended a talk by David Nalley. This issue >> was brought up, and I spoke a little with him afterwards about it. At that >> time, infra had no plans to change anything about how the alerts worked. >> On Feb 2, 2016 19:43, &q

git commits on JIRA issues;

I noticed something different today about the bot that posts git commits to applicable JIRA issues. I recently worked on SOLR-7968 -- super simple with 2 commits, one for master and one for branch_5x. I promptly saw a comment appear after each commit. But then today, to my surprise, I got

Re: Updating whoweare page

Thanks for this cleanup Jan. I'm not sure how useful the date of joining is. It's not a proxy for who is active, which is more useful but also hard to capture. Perhaps we could link to BlackDuck's "OpenHub" (formerly oholoh.net or something like that; it was a terrible name I always typo'ed)

Re: "newdev" Label Reminder

Thanks for the reminder Jason; I'll keep this in mind. I'll create an issue today I have in mind as appropriate for newdev :-) On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 8:56 AM Jason Gerlowski wrote: > Hi all, > > Just wanted to remind everyone of the "newdev" label, which is used to >

Re: Ongoing index maintenance

Hi, I don't think the Lucene layer is lacking in this regard. Higher up the stack in Solr (or ES), it's conceivable one could do some of the functions you propose by adding by wrapping the reader (FilteredReader) that then does what you want -- removing a field, renaming a field, aliasing a

Re: highlight on phrase search not working

Hi Zaccheo, In general this developer community lives on JIRA. Since you have questions pertaining to that JIRA issue then simply put those comments there. I already commented on that issue a few minutes ago. The general info for "how to contribute" (to Solr; largely applies to Lucene too) is

Re: reviews.apache.org / GIT migration

+1; I can't see how anyone would object to adding/retaining support for the tool. Nobody is forced to use it. I'm curious of the move to Git allows for possibly better options. I've heard good things about Gerrit but I've never tried it. I have mixed feelings of my experience with Reviewboard,

Re: Merge vs Rebase

Rob, I'll trust your assessment of the technical deficiencies of the Hadoop codebase as I have no experience to say one way or the other. But I'm confused why this is relevant to wether they have a decent process & docs on how to use git? For reference I think Erick is referring to this:

Re: Hmm Git mistake I believe

l to future devs digging through the history. > > Mike McCandless > > http://blog.mikemccandless.com > > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:18 AM, david.w.smi...@gmail.com > <david.w.smi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Yup. And when you pulled, you didn't do it via rebase. I

Re: reviews.apache.org / GIT migration

>> So, if you are looking for a tool to assist in reviews, I would recommend >> Review Board. If you are looking for a tool to help you manage the commit >> process, gerrit does that pretty well. >> >> Greg >> >> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 7:42 AM, david.w.smi...@gma

Re: Merge vs Rebase

" but this doesn't add much >>> information >>> > to whoever looks at it. >>> > >>> > What does it matter if this merge commit is from previous master and >>> > feature-commit? Why do we need one additional commit per

Merge vs Rebase

[image: lucene-merge-commit-pic.png] Just to put a little picture to this, I noticed the following: (see attached pic) I suspect it was the bi-product of using a merge based pull (I think the default?) instead of a rebase one, and as a result we have this little loop in the log. No doubt there

Re: intellij git history

ailto:dawid.we...@gmail.com] > >> Sent: Sunday, January 24, 2016 9:59 AM > >> To: dev@lucene.apache.org > >> Subject: Re: intellij git history > >> > >> We can move the reference for master and branch_5x -- these are > >> affected. I can do it tonight and

Re: intellij git history

I'm seeing this too Yonik :-( This really sucks. I googled and found this: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/27797965/showing-graphically-the-equivalent-of-git-log-follow-in-intellij Which makes reference to 2 IntelliJ issue tracker bug reports, both marked as closed years ago. In summary,

Re: Question about release plans amidst the git transition

+1 fine idea Rob! On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:18 AM Robert Muir wrote: > one idea, we could use it to our advantage: as soon as we go to git, > immediately (e.g. after just a few days or whatever) start a 5.5 > release? > > besides keeping things less confusing, it could make

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 5.4.1 RC1

Clearly to me, the facet bug is a critical one to get into the release (and so is index corruption) and I'm glad it was caught in time to make it into this release. I think these are the only "critical" issues I'm aware of so I'm not concerned about "the floodgates opening" unless I hear of other

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-5.4-Linux (32bit/jdk1.8.0_66) - Build # 390 - Still Failing!

I've seen this once before and will investigate this weekend. On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 8:33 AM Policeman Jenkins Server < jenk...@thetaphi.de> wrote: > Build: http://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Solr-5.4-Linux/390/ > Java: 32bit/jdk1.8.0_66 -server -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC > > 1 tests failed. >

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 5.4.1 RC1

+1 SUCCESS! [0:53:42.286712] On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 5:41 AM Adrien Grand wrote: > Please vote for the RC1 release candidate for Lucene/Solr 5.4.1 > > The artifacts can be downloaded from: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-5.4.1-RC1-rev1724447/ >

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 5.3.2-RC1

+1 SUCCESS! [0:49:17.877825] On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 8:21 AM Anshum Gupta wrote: > I forgot to add my own +1. > > SUCCESS! [0:36:47.637916] > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 2:07 AM, Anshum Gupta > wrote: > >> Please vote for the RC1 release

Re: 5.4.1 release

Adrien, Mike: Thanks for working on a 5.4.1 release. IMO the bug you pointed out (LUCENE-2229) should be back-ported because I can't imagine someone depending on this behavior. Its ultimately a bug in the sizing of the fragment, and furthermore only occurs in infrequent circumstances. RE Solr:

Re: Breaking Java back-compat in Solr

Great topic Anshum. I’ve been frustrated with the back-compat situation since Lucene/Solr 5 as a maintainer of my “SolrTextTagger”. One version of the plugin supports 4.3 thru the end of the 4x line, whereas on the 5x side I’ve needed 3 versions already (5.0-5,1, 5.2, 5.3+)! Sometimes on the

Re: CfP about Geospatial Track at ApacheCon, Vancouver

Thanks for the notice/invite, Uwe. I may send a proposal suggestion your way (& to Chris). It’ll be tough to choose between submitting to FOSS4G NA (May 2-5th in Raleigh NC) and ApacheCon. ~ David On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 5:28 AM Uwe Schindler wrote: > Hi Committers, hi Lucene

Re: 5.3.2 bug fix release

Yikes; I’m sure that was painful. So I just back-ported a couple issues, SOLR-8340 & SOLR-8059. I was about to manually keep the 5.3.2 section in branch_5x & trunk in sync but then thought better of it. Might as well wait until 5.3.2 is voted and then do it, since there are bound to be others

Re: Welcome Cassandra Targett to the Lucene / Solr PMC

Welcome Cassandra! On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 10:54 AM Steve Rowe wrote: > I'm pleased to announce that Cassandra has accepted the PMC's invitation > to join. > > Welcome Cassandra! > > Steve > - > To

Re: 5.3.2 bug fix release

I’d like to backport SOLR-8059 & SOLR-8060 (same as SOLR-8340): NPEs that can happen in DebugComponent & HighlightComponent when distrib.singlePass=true (which is implied under certain conditions even if not explicitly =true). On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 8:54 AM Jan Høydahl

Re: Lucene/Solr git mirror will soon turn off

+1 totally agree. Any way; the bloat should largely be the binaries & unrelated projects, not code (small text files). On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:36 PM Doug Turnbull < dturnb...@opensourceconnections.com> wrote: > In defense of more history immediately available--it is often far more > useful

Re: accessing Lucene package members from Solr

Good day Mikhail. Without looking at the details, I have no qualms about making a method public if you need to call it from another package. Just add @lucene.internal to the method; perhaps warn in comments that it’s likely going away in 6.0. ~ David On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 2:47 PM Mikhail

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 5.4.0-RC1

Nice job everyone (especially Upayavira) — we’re getting this one out the door with no respins. I think it’s been many releases before that last happened. ~ David On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 11:30 AM Michael McCandless < luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Erick

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-NightlyTests-5.x - Build # 1040 - Still Failing

Mikhail, In the future, particularly when committing code that uses Java 8 features, be sure to compile & run tests even on the 5x branch after back-porting but before committing. From time to time this fails for stuff, like easy-to-forget cases of not using ‘final’. ~ David On Tue, Dec 8, 2015

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 5.4.0-RC1

+1 for release. (tested with Java 7) SUCCESS! [0:56:31.943245] On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 8:05 PM Steve Rowe wrote: > +1 > > Docs, javadocs, and changes look good. > > Smoke tester was happy with Java7 and Java8: > > SUCCESS! [1:53:58.550314] > > Steve > > > On Dec 7, 2015, at

Re: Lucene/Solr git mirror will soon turn off

I understand Gus; but we’d like to separate the question of wether we should move from svn to git from fixing the git mirror. It’s contentious — I encourage you to search the list archives for some of the arguments. On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 12:53 PM Gus Heck wrote: > If I

Re: Lucene/Solr git mirror will soon turn off

I agree with Rob on this — delete the ‘jar’s from git history, for all the reasons Rob said. If someone wants to attempt to actually *build* an old release, and thus needs the jars, then they are welcome to use ASF SVN archives for that purpose instead, and even then apparently it will be a

Re: 5.4 branch created, feature freeze in place (was Re: A 5.4 release?)

SOLR-8180 (jcl-over-slf4j) is there too now, some 30min ago. On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 2:27 PM Upayavira wrote: > Thx, I hope to create the first RC tomorrow. > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015, at 06:36 PM, Noble Paul wrote: > > I'm done with SOLR-8355 > > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 4:24

Re: 5.4 branch created, feature freeze in place (was Re: A 5.4 release?)

I plan to address SOLR-8180 which is about adding jcl-over-slf4j as a dependency on SolrJ. On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 9:11 AM Upayavira wrote: > I have created the lucene_solr_5_4 branch. Please, no new features in this > branch. > > Please update this thread with any changes you

Re: Next release...

+1 to not sooner than February 2016 (one year later) On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 6:25 AM Adrien Grand wrote: > Le jeu. 12 nov. 2015 à 18:21, Erick Erickson a > écrit : > >> Are there any tentative (not firm commitments) time frames for 6.0? >> > > I

Re: Welcome Areek Zillur to the Lucene / Solr PMC

Welcome Areek! On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 3:49 PM Simon Willnauer wrote: > I'm pleased to announce that Areek has accepted the PMC's invitation to > join. > > Welcome Areek! > > > Simon > -- Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker LinkedIn:

Re: Welcome Dennis Gove as Lucene/Solr committer

Welcome Dennis! On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 10:19 AM Joel Bernstein wrote: > I'm pleased to announce that Dennis Gove has accepted the PMC's > invitation to become a committer. > > Dennis, it's tradition that you introduce yourself with a brief bio. > > Your account is not

Re: Welcome Tomás Fernández Löbbe to the PMC

Welcome Tomás! On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 1:16 PM Tomás Fernández Löbbe wrote: > Thanks everyone! > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Ramkumar R. Aiyengar < > andyetitmo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Congratulations Tomas :) >> On 6 Nov 2015 09:53, "Anshum Gupta"

Re: Welcome Joel Bernstein to the PMC

Welcome Joel! On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 9:26 AM Yonik Seeley wrote: > I'm pleased to announce that Joel as accepted the PMC's invitation to join. > > Welcome Joel! > > -Yonik > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-NightlyTests-5.x - Build # 1003 - Still Failing

I created an issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6873 On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 7:52 PM Apache Jenkins Server < jenk...@builds.apache.org> wrote: > Build: https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-Solr-NightlyTests-5.x/1003/ > > 1 tests failed. > FAILED: >

Re: Welcome Nick Knize as Lucene/Solr committer

Welcome Nick! We’re very fortunate to have your spatial expertise. ~ David On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 1:40 PM Nicholas Knize wrote: > Thanks for the honor to join such a talented group! > > Brief Bio: I started as a Meteorology major in undergrad. After the > Meteorology

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-trunk-Linux (32bit/jdk1.8.0_60) - Build # 14285 - Still Failing!

Thanks! I'm not sure why I didn't find this in my testing. On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 8:00 PM Anshum Gupta wrote: > I've fixed this on both trunk and 5x. > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Policeman Jenkins Server < > jenk...@thetaphi.de> wrote: > >> Build:

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux (64bit/jdk1.7.0_80) - Build # 13979 - Failure!

This is a duplicate of a known issue. Spatial4j 0.5 fixes this. I'll have a patch for that later today. On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 4:42 AM Policeman Jenkins Server < jenk...@thetaphi.de> wrote: > Build: http://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux/13979/ > Java: 64bit/jdk1.7.0_80

Re: LatLonType and wildcard ranges

Already filed long ago: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3977 On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:58 AM Erick Erickson wrote: > I get a parse error (looking at a user's list question) when trying to > do something like: > q=lat_lon_field:[* TO *], something like: > >

Re: Switching AngularUI to default

With the old UI, I suggest doing something to the CSS to make it more obvious you’re using the old UI… like changing the background color or maybe instead of the CSS insert a label somewhere. It’s very confusing to switch and forget which one you’re using! On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 5:11 AM Stefan

Re: Apache Lucene Update 2015-09-04

Thanks for this Mike :-) On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 11:02 AM Michael McCandless wrote: > Lucene summary for this week: > >- A 5.3.1 bugfix release may be coming soon > > >- See the confusion matrix >

Re: Remove woodstox-core-asl and stax2-api dependencies from Solr?

Yeah; Uwe’s story is also as I understand it. IMO the dependencies aren’t worth it unless someone demonstrably proves otherwise. Given that SolJ mostly uses javabin (response by default but not request; and requests tend to be small), XML performance is less of an issue as well. ~ David On Thu,

Re: [VOTE] 5.3.0 RC2

+1 (Java 7) SUCCESS! [1:02:40.331020] -- Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com

Re: [CI] Lucene 5x Linux 64 Test Only - Build # 57226 - Failure!

Added comment to existing issue LUCENE-6671. On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 6:59 AM bu...@elastic.co wrote: *BUILD FAILURE* Build URL http://build-eu-00.elastic.co/job/lucene_linux_java8_64_test_only/57226/ Project:lucene_linux_java8_64_test_only Randomization: JDK8,local,heap[621m],-server

Re: Welcome Christine Poerschke as Lucene/Solr committer

Welcome Christine! ~ David On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 8:43 PM Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) cpoersc...@bloomberg.net wrote: Thanks for the invitation and all the welcomes! super brief bio: * based in the UK (originally from Germany) * software developer in the News Search team

Re: Welcome Mikhail Khludnev as Lucene/Solr committer

Welcome! Well deserved Mikhail! On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 10:24 AM Adrien Grand jpou...@gmail.com wrote: I'm pleased to announce that Mikhail Khludnev has accepted the PMC's invitation to become a committer. Mikhail, it's tradition that you introduce yourself with a brief bio. Your handle

Re: ADDREPLICA and maxShardsPerNode and specifying a node

+1 to all Shai said. On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:42 AM Shai Erera ser...@gmail.com wrote: I think that if addreplica is called, we should assume the user understands what he's doing, and we can safely ignore maxShardsPerNode. +1 in renaming it. I don't think it's late to do anything. First, it

Re: [CI] Lucene 5x Linux 64 Test Only - Build # 54457 - Failure!

hangs... Mike McCandless http://blog.mikemccandless.com On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 10:04 PM, david.w.smi...@gmail.com david.w.smi...@gmail.com wrote: I’m not sure what to make of this. The whole suite timed out after 2 hours. The seed doesn’t reproduce, at least when I ran via IntelliJ

Re: [CI] Lucene 5x Linux 64 Test Only - Build # 54457 - Failure!

I’m not sure what to make of this. The whole suite timed out after 2 hours. The seed doesn’t reproduce, at least when I ran via IntelliJ just this spatial test. It’d be nice if I could have CI re-run the same build with same chosen random seed and JVM args, etc. On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 9:36 AM

Re: solr 4.5 replicated slaves don't delete old files in /index directory

Ted, Please ask again on the solr-user list; this list is for development of Lucene/Solr. Good luck, ~ David On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 1:23 PM Ted Cao ted.cao.bos...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I hope someone is aware of this bug and could point me to either old Jira ticket or advice on how it can be

Re: svn commit: r1688487 - in /lucene/cms/trunk/content/solr: assets/images/book_as3ess.jpg assets/images/book_asess_3ed.jpg assets/images/book_s14ess.jpg resources.mdtext

Ah; I see you fixed it already. Thanks! On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 7:18 PM david.w.smi...@gmail.com david.w.smi...@gmail.com wrote: Palm-to-face! I'll fix later today. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 5:29 PM Chris Hostetter hossman_luc...@fucit.org wrote: Ummm, david ... i hate to tell you

Re: svn commit: r1688487 - in /lucene/cms/trunk/content/solr: assets/images/book_as3ess.jpg assets/images/book_asess_3ed.jpg assets/images/book_s14ess.jpg resources.mdtext

Palm-to-face! I'll fix later today. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 5:29 PM Chris Hostetter hossman_luc...@fucit.org wrote: Ummm, david ... i hate to tell you this, but it looks like you forgot the L in Solr in the title of your own book. more then once. :) :

Re: Version field as DV

I don’t know if it’s worth it in terms of the trade-offs, but there’s something to be said about having *both* indexed=true docValues=true on the _version_ field in particular. docValues is not an “index”; any operation other than looking up the value for a specific document is O(docs) with

Re: Welcome Upayavira as Lucene/Solr committer

Welcome Upayavira! On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 3:02 PM Steve Rowe sar...@gmail.com wrote: I'm pleased to announce that Upayavira has accepted the PMC's invitation to become a committer. Upayavira, it's tradition that you introduce yourself with a brief bio. Mike McCandless, the Lucene PMC

Instructions on Solr's website about adding books

Solr’s “Resources” page, by the book section, contains this lead in text: http://lucene.apache.org/solr/resources.html#solr-books If you have a Solr book that you would like to see listed here, please submit a patch http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HowToContribute via a JIRA with the appropriate

Re: Looks like I broke Solr 5.2.0 - do we need a 5.2.1?

if adjacent path segments w ere co-linear Karl On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:30 PM, david.w.smi...@gmail.com david.w.smi...@gmail.com wrote: LUCENE-6535 is another one. On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:57 AM Shalin Shekhar Mangar shalinman...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Steve! On Tue, Jun 9, 2015

Re: Looks like I broke Solr 5.2.0 - do we need a 5.2.1?

LUCENE-6535 is another one. On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:57 AM Shalin Shekhar Mangar shalinman...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Steve! On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 7:25 PM, Steve Rowe sar...@gmail.com wrote: On Jun 9, 2015, at 8:57 AM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar shalinman...@gmail.com wrote: Looks

Re: Looks like I broke Solr 5.2.0 - do we need a 5.2.1?

As mention in the JIRA ticket; this won’t be back-ported as it only applies to the WGS84 feature added in 5.3. Sorry for any confusion. On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:42 PM david.w.smi...@gmail.com david.w.smi...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah, I’ll port that too. On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:36 PM Karl

Re: Looks like I broke Solr 5.2.0 - do we need a 5.2.1?

it for official release without trying to shoehorn a patch into 5.2.1 that's not critical to normal Solr/Lucene functioning. On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 9:42 AM, david.w.smi...@gmail.com david.w.smi...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah, I’ll port that too. On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:36 PM Karl Wright daddy

Re: Looks like I broke Solr 5.2.0 - do we need a 5.2.1?

A user found a nasty DefaultSolrHighlighter performance bug with an easy fix — https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-7655 I’m running tests now. On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 2:48 PM david.w.smi...@gmail.com david.w.smi...@gmail.com wrote: I’m +1 to this. We can consider changing our mind once

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux (64bit/jdk1.7.0_80) - Build # 12789 - Failure!

Bug filed: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6535 On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 8:42 PM Policeman Jenkins Server jenk...@thetaphi.de wrote: Build: http://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux/12789/ Java: 64bit/jdk1.7.0_80 -XX:-UseCompressedOops -XX:+UseG1GC 1 tests failed.

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-trunk-Linux (64bit/jdk1.9.0-ea-b60) - Build # 12975 - Failure!

Ignore this; I'll fix the test Tuesday. On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 11:36 AM Policeman Jenkins Server jenk...@thetaphi.de wrote: Build: http://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Solr-trunk-Linux/12975/ Java: 64bit/jdk1.9.0-ea-b60 -XX:-UseCompressedOops -XX:+UseSerialGC 2 tests failed. FAILED:

Re: TokenOrderingFilter

Hi Dmitry, Ideally, the token stream produces tokens that have a startOffset = the startOffset of the previous token from the stream. Sometime in the past year or so, this was enforced at the indexing layer, I think. There used to be TokenFilters that violated this contract; I think earlier

Re: VOTE: RC0 release apache-solr-ref-guide-5.2.pdf

+1 looks good to me too. I like some of the visual tweaks done to make the formatting/theme similar to the website. On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 5:07 PM Cassandra Targett casstarg...@gmail.com wrote: +1, it looks good to me. Cassandra On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Chris Hostetter

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-trunk-MacOSX (64bit/jdk1.8.0) - Build # 2377 - Failure!

Can you take a look Karl? At first glance looking at the code, not running it, I’m guessing this is a degenerate path segment that is too short. On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 11:19 PM Policeman Jenkins Server jenk...@thetaphi.de wrote: Build:

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux (64bit/jdk1.7.0_80) - Build # 12734 - Failure!

Woops; I’ll fix. This was a Java 8 / Java 7 issue. On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 9:40 AM Policeman Jenkins Server jenk...@thetaphi.de wrote: Build: http://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux/12734/ Java: 64bit/jdk1.7.0_80 -XX:-UseCompressedOops -XX:+UseG1GC All tests passed Build Log:

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-5.x-Windows (32bit/jdk1.7.0_80) - Build # 4760 - Failure!

I fixed this already. On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 10:10 AM Policeman Jenkins Server jenk...@thetaphi.de wrote: Build: http://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Solr-5.x-Windows/4760/ Java: 32bit/jdk1.7.0_80 -server -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC All tests passed Build Log: [...truncated 5664 lines...]

Re: Moving to git?

Nice! On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 1:31 PM Steve Davids sdav...@gmail.com wrote: bq. Something needs to be done about all those jars in the source history, I will not let this go. I went ahead and used the BFG Repo Cleaner https://rtyley.github.io/bfg-repo-cleaner/ tool to drop all of the old

Re: Moving to git?

I like where this is going! I also think history of source code is very important, but not history of ‘.jar’ files that shouldn’t have been in source control in the first place. I’m fiercely negative about large binaries or ‘jar’ files that can be downloaded by the build system (e.g. ivy) in

Re: Moving to git?

that is totally broken here with respect to history. On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 6:47 PM, Robert Muir rcm...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 4:39 PM, david.w.smi...@gmail.com david.w.smi...@gmail.com wrote: If we were to come up with a new git repo that doesn’t have the ‘.jar’s, it’d be good

Re: [VOTE] 5.2.0 RC2

It’d be nice if something like that failed the build. There’s kind of a soft dependency there for Solr’s logging admin screen, which is optional. ~ David On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 12:45 AM Tomás Fernández Löbbe tomasflo...@gmail.com wrote: Unfortunately I imported log4j Logger instead of

Re: Moving to git?

+1 to git. Git may not be perfect, but SVN isn’t either. On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:59 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya ichattopadhy...@gmail.com wrote: Life is so much easier on long train/plane journeys with Git. +1. On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Shai Erera ser...@gmail.com wrote: +1 to

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-trunk-Linux (64bit/jdk1.8.0_45) - Build # 12825 - Failure!

This is not a real bug; it’s the test asserting it finds a minimum number relation types over many random shapes… but that can sometimes be asking too much. I filed an issue to improve, which I’ll get to shortly: LUCENE-6502 - Spatial RectIntersectionTestHelper should only require one of each

Re: official ASF Jenkins Slave moved to Ubuntu 14.04

Thanks for your hard work on keeping Lucene/Solr well tested! On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 5:23 PM Uwe Schindler u...@thetaphi.de wrote: Hi all, the old lucene-zones.apache.org machine, running on FreeBSD, was disabled an hour ago and all Jobs migrated. This old machine was not able to run Java

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux (64bit/jdk1.8.0_60-ea-b12) - Build # 12585 - Still Failing!

For a long while on my local checkout, I have svn:ignore at the root level set to ‘*’. I really think we should consider committing this; I think I’ve advocated for it before. RE “precommit” being a pain — yeah but, like Mike already said, it catches problems. At least it’s faster lately than

TermsQuery in ‘join’ module redundant?

Today I noticed org.apache.lucene.search.join.TermsQuery (package access) in the join module that is functionally equivalent to one by the same name in the queries module. It may be a bit historical since the one in the queries module until recently was a Filter, not a Query. But now there is

Re: Configsets and Config APIs in Solr

+1 Tomas. On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 12:40 PM Tomás Fernández Löbbe tomasflo...@gmail.com wrote: I agree about differentiating the mutable part (configoverlay, generated schema, etc) and the immutable (the configset) , but I think it would be better if the mutable part is placed under

Re: [CI] Lucene 5x Linux Java8 64 Test Only - Build # 46430 - Failure!

That test utility class was ported (copied) from Spatial4j. As a copy, it could be modified to extend LTC. Ideally, Spatial4j would publish the test JAR so that this could have been used without copying it (which will be addressed in the next release; Nick fixed this)… although then extending

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-trunk-MacOSX (64bit/jdk1.8.0) - Build # 2270 - Failure!

This turned out to be a bug in the test infrastructure that Geo3d uses, copied from Spatial4j: Permalink https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6196?focusedCommentId=14531165page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14531165 I’m fixing. On Wed, May 6,

Re: Modifying DefaultSolrHighlighter

Hi Dmitry, I am pretty well versed in the sub-class-ability of DefaultSolrHighlighter. Most likely the problem you see is that you are using the no-arg constructor. Instead, pass in a SolrCore. It is called via reflection. In 5.2 I removed the no-arg constructor. ~ David On Tue, May 5, 2015

Re: Modifying DefaultSolrHighlighter

) { this.solrCore = solrCore; } should we use the second one? Regards, Dmitry On 5 May 2015 at 15:03, david.w.smi...@gmail.com david.w.smi...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Dmitry, I am pretty well versed in the sub-class-ability of DefaultSolrHighlighter. Most likely the problem you see

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux (32bit/jdk1.9.0-ea-b60) - Build # 12349 - Failure!

The root cause is that Spatial4j’s DistanceUtils.distHaversineRAD returned NaN for a pair of anti-podal points. I filled a bug in Spatial4j: https://github.com/spatial4j/spatial4j/issues/104 On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 10:19 PM david.w.smi...@gmail.com david.w.smi...@gmail.com wrote: I’ll look

Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux (32bit/jdk1.9.0-ea-b60) - Build # 12349 - Failure!

I’ll look into it. On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 10:17 PM Policeman Jenkins Server jenk...@thetaphi.de wrote: Build: http://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Solr-5.x-Linux/12349/ Java: 32bit/jdk1.9.0-ea-b60 -server -XX:+UseG1GC 1 tests failed. FAILED:

  1   2   3   >