On Jan 10, 2011, at 5:59 AM, Simon Willnauer wrote:
> hey,
>
> today I came across function query in lucene and that reminded me that
> Solr is already using its own derived version which is no good IMO. We
> should try to consolidate the two version and make solr use the
> consolidated version
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Simon Willnauer <
simon.willna...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> So moving stuff to modules has several advantages compared to trunk. I
> think we all agree that we want lucene to be able to make use of this
> functinality right?! So if we keep it in core we can either t
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Doron Cohen wrote:
> +1 for having a single function query - actually this is what LUCENE-1081
> and SOLR-192 is about. I'd look at this after LUCENE-1812, but this is
> waiting so long now, please go ahead with this, I'll follow/join.
good stuff...
>
> -0 for mo
+1 for having a single function query - actually this is what LUCENE-1081
and SOLR-192 is about. I'd look at this after LUCENE-1812, but this is
waiting so long now, please go ahead with this, I'll follow/join.
-0 for moving function to modules - I think this is used as core capability
by many app
+1 to this idea.
I recall talking to Robert and Mark about it as a good first step as part of
the spatial code consolidation as well.
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 11:59 PM, Simon Willnauer <
simon.willna...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> hey,
>
> today I came across function query in lucene and that remind
hey,
today I came across function query in lucene and that reminded me that
Solr is already using its own derived version which is no good IMO. We
should try to consolidate the two version and make solr use the
consolidated version which would even be good for lucene users. It
seems it would make
