PayloadDecoder.FLOAT_DECODER

In reviewing SOLR-14787 , with the author verbally, he pointed out there's some duplicated code where he needed to decode a payload into a float. We have org.apache.lucene.analysis.payloads.PayloadHelper#decodeFloat(byte[], int) but lucene/queries

Re: [VOTE] Lucene logo contest, third time's a charm

A2, A1, D (binding) On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 7:37 PM Varun Thacker wrote: > (non-binding) > vote: A1, A2, D > > On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 1:21 PM Ryan Ernst wrote: > >> Dear Lucene and Solr developers! >> >> Sorry for the multiple threads. This should be the last one. >> >> In February a contest was

Re: Approach towards solving split package issues?

+1 to fixing and +1 to doing it in a major release. On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 4:32 PM Adrien Grand wrote: > +1 Changing packages of many classes should be done in a major. > > On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 5:50 PM Tomoko Uchida > wrote: > >> Just to make sure, could I confirm "when the changes will be ou

Re: [VOTE] Lucene logo contest, here we go again

A1, D (binding) On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 3:33 AM Anshum Gupta wrote: > Based on the options, I like the current one the most. > > D (binding) > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 5:26 PM Ryan Ernst wrote: > >> Dear Lucene and Solr developers! >> >> In February a contest was started to design a new logo fo

Re: SIP-10: Solr 9 examples: Can we use Ref Guide as a dogfood example?

Some background to consider before committing to that... it might not be as trivial as you think. (I've often thought it ironic that we don't have real search for our ref guide... ) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DixlnxAk08s -Gus On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 2:06 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < ichattopad

Re: Solr configuration options

are exactly about packaging > code and config) > > On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 11:11 AM Gus Heck wrote: > >> Which means whoever wants to make changes to solr needs to be >> able/willing/competent to make AMI/dockers/etc ... and one has to manage >> versions of those vari

Re: Solr configuration options

and you are doing an upgrade, you probably want your old nodes (running > with your old AMI/Docker image with old jars) to keep the old configuration > and your new nodes to use the new. > > On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 10:42 AM Gus Heck wrote: > >> Putting solr.xml in zookeeper me

Re: Solr configuration options

Putting solr.xml in zookeeper means you can add a node simply by starting solr pointing to the zookeeper, and ensure a consistent solr.xml for the new node if you've customized it. Since I rarely (never) hit use cases where I need different per node solr.xml. I generally advocate putting it in ZK,

Re: RoadMap?

As amusing as the pattern has been (6.6, 7.7, 8.8?) we don't actually have to release 9 point releases (9.9) before 10.0 :). I'd advocate that some things we don't feel we can remove in 9.0 hang on for a few point releases and when we're ready to ditch them we declare 10.0. if that's after 9.2 or 9

Re: 8.7 Release

Also, we should try to respect the stuff we have put on the roadmap (Which includes me getting a patch up for SIP-9 much sooner rather than even a little later!) On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 5:18 PM Adrien Grand wrote: > Thanks for the explanation Ishan. > > On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 10:33 PM Ishan Cha

Re: Welcome Atri Sharma to the PMC

Welcome! :) On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 4:44 PM jim ferenczi wrote: > Welcome Atri! > > Le jeu. 20 août 2020 à 22:00, Jan Høydahl a > écrit : > >> Welcome Atri! >> >> Jan >> >> 20. aug. 2020 kl. 20:16 skrev Ishan Chattopadhyaya < >> ichattopadhy...@gmail.com>: >> >>  >> I am pleased to announce th

Re: Mark Miller's beasting script what do we do instead if we remove Ant from trunk.

mark's script does use parallel. Also I suspect I can guess, but could we define "pure unit test" to ensure I haven't got a different concept of that than what you mean? On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 11:25 AM Gus Heck wrote: > If you're beasting a single test that won't tak

Re: Mark Miller's beasting script what do we do instead if we remove Ant from trunk.

If you're beasting a single test that won't take advantage of multiple processors... On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 10:31 AM Robert Muir wrote: > Is a beasting script needed with gradle? Can't you do it efficiently with > a simple shell script loop? If you have the gradle daemon running, overhead > wil

Re: Performance testing is necessary now

o setup automated benchmarks, but it will take a while (weeks, > not months). The suite is functional, I'm just identifying the right > datasets and queries at the moment. Help welcome (SOLR-10317). But until > that happens, are you comfortable in letting problems like SOLR-14665 >

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.6.1 RC2

SUCCESS! [0:54:03.106188] And installed the tarball as a 4 node cluster, created a collection and added a document - success :) +1 On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 12:13 PM Timothy Potter wrote: > Thanks Houston. > > SUCCESS! [1:34:35.219332] > > +1 > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 1:02 PM Houston Putman >

Re: Performance testing is necessary now

I think we need to get the system for measuring performance in place before we can issue a mandate. The analogy is "test the application functionality carefully before chcking in" vs "run these unit tests before checking in." Even if everyone does their own microbenchmarks they likely won't be comp

Re: RoadMap?

suddenly from the > page when work really starts on them? > > On Tue 11 Aug 2020 at 17:15, Gus Heck wrote: > >> Cool, since I brought it up, I can volunteer to help manage the page. We >> should get jira issue links in there wherever possible. Do we want to build >>

Re: RoadMap?

Cool, since I brought it up, I can volunteer to help manage the page. We should get jira issue links in there wherever possible. Do we want to build an initial list and have some sort of Proposed/Planned workflow so readers can have confidence (or appropriate lack of confidence) in what they see th

Re: hybrid document routing

Sounds like complex ACLs based on group memberships that use graph queries ? that would require local ACL's... On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 5:56 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > This seems like an XY problem. Would it be possible to describe the > original problem that led

Re: Missing class for tests

ing how to do that (and pointing out the significance of doing so) -Gus On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 5:25 PM Gus Heck wrote: > Does anyone have (and can check in) the code for this class? I've got a > failure loading this class but I can't troubleshoot it because apparently > onl

Missing class for tests

Does anyone have (and can check in) the code for this class? I've got a failure loading this class but I can't troubleshoot it because apparently only a binary file is checked in... NS2-MacBook-Pro:lucene-solr gus$ grep -r "MyTextField" * solr/core/src/test/org/apache/solr/pkg/TestPackages.java:

Re: Naming of non-SolrCloud clusters in the Ref Guide

There may be other things, but off the top of my head, Streaming expressions and TRA's are not available in "legacy"... On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 11:49 AM Cassandra Targett wrote: > On Aug 6, 2020, 10:22 AM -0500, Gus Heck , wrote: > > WRT the name "uncoordinated mode

Re: Naming of non-SolrCloud clusters in the Ref Guide

Just occurred to me: Maybe no adjective for the current zookeeper based mode just "Solr" and the non-zookeeper (legacy/uncoordinated/clumsy) could be Solr "Lite" which has a nice pun and very much fits with reduced functionality with less infrastructure. On Thu, Aug 6, 2020

Re: When zero offsets are not bad - a.k.a. multi-token synonyms yet again

I've had a nearly identical experience to what Dave describes, I also chafe under this restriction. On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 11:07 AM David Smiley wrote: > I sympathize with your pain, Roman. > > It appears we can't really do index-time multi-word synonyms because of > the offset ordering rule. B

Re: Naming of non-SolrCloud clusters in the Ref Guide

WRT the name "uncoordinated mode" I fear it could be read (or even become known as) as "clumsy mode" which is humorous but possibly not what we're going for :) I'd perhaps suggest Cluster mode for SolrCloud though I'm not entirely sure if Legacy Solr (in curren parlance) is not a "cluster" too, clu

Re: Standardize Leading Test or Trailing Test

Yeah +1 for standardization +1.01 if it lands on *Test :) but that's just my personal preference. On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 9:17 AM Adrien Grand wrote: > +1 > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 1:54 PM Erick Erickson > wrote: > >> This has amused/annoyed me for a long time. But did I ever have the >> e

Re: Deprecate Schemaless Mode?

wn, see the discussion at: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5287. > > I _think_ this is a different issue if the configs have to be residing on > the system, not coming in from outside, just FYI... > > > On Aug 3, 2020, at 7:03 PM, Gus Heck wrote: > > > >

Re: Welcome Gus Heck to the PMC

..@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I am pleased to announce that Gus Heck has accepted the PMC's invitation >> to join. >> >> Congratulations and welcome, Gus! >> > > > -- > Regards, > Shalin Shekhar Mangar. > -- http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work) http://www.the111shift.com (play)

Re: Deprecate Schemaless Mode?

On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 5:03 PM Erick Erickson wrote: > Gus’s point about implementing something before removing it is well taken, > but we can deprecate it immediately without removing it. Gus’s point about > dynamic fields not being found until later in the cycle is well taken, but > not enough

Re: Deprecate Schemaless Mode?

I almost never use schemaless mode (better named "schema guessing mode") and I would never recommend it for use beyond prototyping. The primary use I see for it is to throw a bunch of data at it to get a starting point for a schema... say for example you want to see what tika's going to produce for

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.6.1 RC1

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14706 On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 8:29 AM Gus Heck wrote: > I have reproduced the stack trace above and condition where collections > cannot be created by upgrading an 8.6.0 with 8.6.1, filing an issue right > now, changing my vote to -1 from +0

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.6.1 RC1

non-binding +1 from me. Wanted to share with the community because most > probably are not running Corretto. > >> > >> Hope this helps. > >> > >> marcus > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 9:36 PM Gus Heck wrote: > &

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.6.1 RC1

ince "one extra tag in cores" appears to be referring to a cores attribute that has only one value, but no idea yet if I'm reading that error message right. ... As to how I got that, I'm pretty sure it was one of the times when my edits to cloud.sh errored and tried to deploy

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.6.1 RC1

I Got: Ubuntu 18.04.4 LTS: SUCCESS! [0:53:02.203047] Mac OS 10.13: SUCCESS! [1:00:57.938586] BUT... when I deployed the tarball locally and tried to create a collection (single shard, _default config, via the solr UI), I got: 2020-08-03 02:55:15.585 INFO (zkCallback-14-thread-1) [ ] o.a.s.

Re: 8.6.1 Release

t; >>> Will begin the release process tomorrow when my GPG Keys will be >>> refreshed in all of the apache systems. >>> >>> - Houston >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 4:41 PM Gus Heck wrote: >>> >>>> Doc changes are i

Re: Building Ref Guide on branch_8x

On master the asciidoctor version is specified in the gradle build, so I think only 8x needs an update. On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 5:29 PM Houston Putman wrote: > Nah, 8x and master should be fine. Good find > > On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 5:11 PM Gus Heck wrote: > >> Found it.

Re: Building Ref Guide on branch_8x

Found it... there's another critical version not listed in the readme... when I did this upgrade it suddenly worked: asciidoctor (1.5.6.2 < 2.0.10) Will update README.adoc... won't bother with 8_6 branch though unless you want it. On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 4:57 PM Gus Heck wrot

Re: Building Ref Guide on branch_8x

Might be the jekyll-asciidoc version? > > - Houston > > On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 2:44 PM Gus Heck wrote: > >> meh forgot that images get stripped... it shows 3 other places where the >> same <<# syntax for an anchor is used... >> >> On Mon, Jul 2

Re: 8.6.1 Release

Doc changes are in. Still having trouble with that one link in 8x but just fixed it locally and made sure not to push that change. On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 12:57 PM Gus Heck wrote: > 8x docs not building smoothly on my laptop... (without changes) > troubleshooting, checking deps lis

Re: Building Ref Guide on branch_8x

meh forgot that images get stripped... it shows 3 other places where the same <<# syntax for an anchor is used... On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 2:42 PM Gus Heck wrote: > I've verified all the versions for gems mentioned in README.adoc > > * HTML version, using Jekyll: > **

Building Ref Guide on branch_8x

I've verified all the versions for gems mentioned in README.adoc * HTML version, using Jekyll: ** `Ruby` (v2.3 or higher) ** The following gems must be installed: *** `jekyll`: v3.5, not v4.x. Use `gem install jekyll --force --version 3.5.0` to force install of v3.5.0. *** `jekyll-asciidoc`: v2.1

Re: 8.6.1 Release

> On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 11:27 AM Gus Heck wrote: > >> I realized after I went looking for it in the new docs that I didn't >> actually push the doc changes for MOVEREPLICA to 8x (had intended to verify >> that nothing differed in 8x before pushing). Doing that now, a

Re: 8.6.1 Release

I realized after I went looking for it in the new docs that I didn't actually push the doc changes for MOVEREPLICA to 8x (had intended to verify that nothing differed in 8x before pushing). Doing that now, and suspect that we probably want to include it for 8.6.1 On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 10:20 PM V

Re: Approach for a new Autoscaling framework

effort to define an "Autoscaling" framework interface. >>>>> >>>>> I'd be happy to try to see what concepts could be shared and how a >>>>> generic plugin facade could be defined. >>>>> >>>>> What are the oth

Re: Approach for a new Autoscaling framework

erstanding the tradeoffs and > generalizing later. > > Also I'd like to make sure we're not paying a performance "genericity tax" > in Autoscaling for unneeded features. > > Ilan > > Le sam. 25 juil. 2020 à 16:02, Gus Heck a écrit : > >> Scann

Re: Approach for a new Autoscaling framework

Scanned through the PR and read some of this thread. I likely have missed much other discussion, so forgive me if I'm dredging up somethings that are already discussed elsewhere. The idea of designing the interfaces defining what information is available seems good here, but I worry that it's too

Re: RoadMap?

on" field could indicate when we want to fix it by. Then we just need a tag in jira and perhaps a branch. Alternately (or maybe additionally) we could make a "board" if that's easier to monitor. On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 2:02 PM Gus Heck wrote: > Jira typically has features for

Re: RoadMap?

ing some > progress with Ilan and Noble so I’m cautiously optimistic. > > > >> On 2 Jul 2020, at 18:58, Gus Heck wrote: > >> > >> Should we have one? > >> > >> With 9x having java 11 and gradle migrations on the dev side, and about >

RoadMap?

Should we have one? With 9x having java 11 and gradle migrations on the dev side, and about to have a significant round of deprecations/removals and migrations to plugin for things such as CDCR, DIH etc (see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-13442 and https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse

Re: Wiki access to post SIP

I tried to help Mike (user: nibeck) by creating the page for him but it seems he also doesn't have edit perms. On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 3:52 PM Nibeck, Mike wrote: > I need permission to post a proposal to the SIP pages. I don’t not current > have access to add the sub-page to document the propos

Re: Welcome Ilan Ginzburg as Lucene/Solr committer

Congrats, welcome :) On Sun, Jun 21, 2020, 1:32 PM Bruno Roustant wrote: > Congrats Ilan! > > Le dim. 21 juin 2020 à 17:10, Yonik Seeley a écrit : > >> Congrats Ilan! >> -Yonik >> >> >> On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 5:44 AM Noble Paul wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Please join me in welcoming Ilan Gi

Re: [VOTE] Lucene logo contest

>From the comments, I sense some confusion, (or perhaps I was confused)... at least as I read the vote mail, there are 3 options and 4 links, the first link doesn't appear to be presented as an option, but rather as background info. (and if you scroll down has several variations, the last of which

Re: [VOTE] Lucene logo contest

Easy, at a glance legibility is important for logos +1 for A... though I like the original form, with the green palate because extending the triangle downwards made the L harder to read. (to my taste at least) (committer, not PMC) On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 6:08 PM Ryan Ernst wrote: > Dear Lucen

Replica commands

In Attempting to improve the docs for MOVEREPLICA I've wound up reading a lot of code (to be sure that my additions/changes actually bring us closer to what solr actually does!) and I've noticed a couple of things that seem odd, possibly unfinished... There is a "parallel" attribute being extract

Re: Welcome Mayya Sharipova as Lucene/Solr committer

Welcome :) On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 2:43 PM Nhat Nguyen wrote: > Congratulations and welcome, Mayya! > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 2:38 PM Nicholas Knize wrote: > >> Congrats Mayya and welcome aboard! >> >> Nicholas Knize, Ph.D., GISP >> Geospatial Software Guy | Elasticsearch >> Apache Lucene PMC

Re: Moving Solr to Apache TLP

It's now unclear if non PMC folks should be on or off the list on the wiki (and how do we ensure we get added in the end?) On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 1:39 PM David Smiley wrote: > If we don't do opt-in (and there's plenty of people who seem to want > opt-out instead), then I propose we instead seek

Re: [VOTE] Solr to become a top-level Apache project (TLP)

(having not read all replies, just the message I added binding... later replies indicate that i should have said -1 (committer) On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 7:53 AM Gus Heck wrote: > -1 (binding) > > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 6:53 AM Joel Bernstein wrote: > >> -1 (binding) >&

Re: [VOTE] Solr to become a top-level Apache project (TLP)

-1 (binding) On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 6:53 AM Joel Bernstein wrote: > -1 (binding) > > > Joel Bernstein > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ > > > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 4:39 AM Tomoko Uchida < > tomoko.uchida.1...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Personally, I am not particularly interested in "promoting" Sol

Re: Getting warnings out

uch >>>> work for any one person to have a hope of doing in any reasonable period >>>> without introducing errors. >>>> >>>> There are just too many warnings for one person to have a hope of >>>> thinking carefully about all of them, so

Re: Getting warnings out

I typically battle warnings by conquering one file/directory at a time... And letting Intellij take me from warning to warning with F2 key really really really speeds things up. This is a wider set than compiler warnings, but you can customize it, and many of the additional warnings are auto-solvab

Re: [DISCUSS] Lucene-Solr split (Solr promoted to TLP)

On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 11:55 AM Mike Drob wrote: > Solr maintaining a fork of Lucene sounds like exactly the situation that > let to the original merge, where there are two sets of divergent development > Exactly

Re: [DISCUSS] Lucene-Solr split (Solr promoted to TLP)

> > IMO, if we need to say “we can’t release X because it breaks Y”, or “we > need to release X to be able to release Y”, the projects are not really > independent, and “the PMCs will overlap” won’t take us very far. > This. I don't think the two really can be separated. Any separation will merely

Re: Solr Admin UI Refresh 2020

need a >> separate smoketester? >> - UI is not tested as part of Solr, breaking changes may be merged >> unnoticed. (This can be mitigated with e2e Jenkins tests) >> >> There may be downsides I have not thought of, but interested in your >> thoughts >> >>

Re: Solr Admin UI Refresh 2020

; broad! Props to him. >>> >> Marcus, are you working with Jeremy Branham on this? >>> >> >>> >> On Wed, 22 Apr, 2020, 2:25 pm Jan Høydahl, >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> WRT legal aspect, the original git repo >

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 7.7.3 RC1

+1 (linux ubuntu 18.04) SUCCESS! [0:43:51.661530] On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 12:44 PM Houston Putman wrote: > +1 > > > SUCCESS! [1:23:37.392736] > > I also ran the multi-valued field performance test on 7.7.2 and 7.7.3 > (rc1) to make sure that the backport of SOLR-14013 >

Re: Solr Admin UI Refresh 2020

gt;> On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 2:01 PM Marcus Eagan >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Gus, At first it looked like it let me, but today it seemed that it did >>> not allow me to create a SIP. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 8:57 AM

Re: Solr Admin UI Refresh 2020

> > First, sorry you’re having problems with Confluence. I suspect the issue > is permissions. There are only two groups allowed to add pages to the SOLR > space, “lucene” and “lucene-pmc”. I believe these correspond to ASF LDAP > groups, which would mean they include committers and PMC members onl

Re: Solr Admin UI Refresh 2020

gt;>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > > 9. apr. 2020 kl. 20:06 skrev Cassandra Targett < >>>>>>>>> casstarg...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > >  >>>>>

Re: Lucene 9.0 Java module system support

While the module system sounds nice in theory, my experience is unfortunately that it is quite difficult to use for any application with many existing dependencies, 90% or more of projects don't use it and therefore wind up in the default module. I've wasted many hours trying to get it to work in f

Re: Solr Admin UI Refresh 2020

ignificant UI expertise in the team. Erickson finds > his way to open every cookie jar. Erik Hatcher wrote the first version of > Blacklight. I've seen Pugh do lots of work on Quepid's UI. Jan and Kevin > have done a lot of work, and so have many others. The list goes on, and > *likes

Re: Solr Admin UI Refresh 2020

ecific choices like frameworks will be helping build in some respect at > some point now or in the future. Is that a fair or misguided assumption? > > Marcus > > On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 17:15 Gus Heck wrote: > >> +1 for Angular CLI / Typescript since I've fiddled with t

Re: Welcome Eric Pugh as a Lucene/Solr committer

Congratulations! :) Welcome On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 5:03 PM Doug Turnbull < dturnb...@opensourceconnections.com> wrote: > Eric, great work! Congrats! > > Yes we need to see a pic of that quilt... ;) > > On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 4:40 PM Mikhail Khludnev wrote: > >> Welcome, Eric. >> >> On Tue, Apr 7

Re: Solr Admin UI Refresh 2020

+1 for Angular CLI / Typescript since I've fiddled with this in a minor way recently, Also MIT license is super friendly. Separate App - hmm... that's got some attraction, but also gives my stomach some churning when I think about solr now requiring management of 3 different servers (solr, somethi

Re: [DISCUSS] SIP-4 Solr should own the bootstrap process

This SIP would also make a unification of timeout configuration much easier (SOLR-13457) On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 11:24 AM Jan Høydahl wrote: > Thanks Uwe, > > I’m not sure what should be the scope of SIP-4. It can grow almost as much > as we want it to since it will enable so many new things. Bu

Re: Congratulations to the new Lucene/Solr PMC Chair, Anshum Gupta!

Congratulations :) On Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 8:21 PM Đạt Cao Mạnh wrote: > Congrats Anshum!! > > On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 08:43, Michael McCandless < > luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote: > >> Congrats Anshum! It's great fun! >> >> Mike >> >> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 6:24 PM Steve Rowe wrote: >> >>> Co

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.4.0 RC1

Hi Mkhail, This is a known flakey test (mine, it's on my to do list). Seems to have got slightly more flakey recently possibly because other tests have got better at using up CPU?. The flake here is that the code in the test didn't manage to wait long enough before running the assertion. This failu

Re: ZoneId.systemDefault()

Nope, but I saw it in a recent contribution. On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 4:47 AM Dawid Weiss wrote: > Looks to me like a good candidate. Are we using it anywhere? > > D. > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 5:45 AM Gus Heck wrote: > > > > Hi Folks, > > > > Should

ZoneId.systemDefault()

Hi Folks, Should ZoneId.systemDefault() be in forbidden API's? Seems like something we probably never want to use -Gus -- http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work) http://www.the111shift.com (play)

Re: Commit / Code Review Policy

And a link to guidelines on what goes where On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 10:49 AM Jan Høydahl wrote: > The SIP template should have a question that each proposal MUST answer: > > “Describe your consideration of what goes in solr-core and what goes in > packages or contrib.” > > Jan Høydahl > > 5.

Re: Commit / Code Review Policy

Some thoughts from reading the doc and this thread 1. This doesn't sound like a huge change, mostly a change in tone since nearly everything in it is a judgement call. 2. I agree that the word policy seems iffy. It has a "consequences for violation" tone to it, and without some sort o

Re: Welcome Houston Putman as Lucene/Solr committer

Congratulations and welcome :) On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 11:52 AM Namgyu Kim wrote: > Congratulations and welcome, Houston! :D > > On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 1:18 AM Ken LaPorte wrote: > >> Congratulations Houston! Well deserved honor. >> >> >> >> -- >> Sent from: >> https://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.

Re: Gradle build

+1 to option 2 On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 6:23 PM David Smiley wrote: > > Doing 2 doesn’t stop us going to 3 soon if we want. Easier to fix/improve > on one branch while it’s new. > > On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 5:41 PM Adrien Grand wrote: > >> I'd be fine with option 2 but I have a slight preference f

Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene/Solr 8.3.0 RC2

SUCCESS! [0:54:45.321103] On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 1:01 PM Kevin Risden wrote: > +1 > SUCCESS! [1:34:11.886834] > > Kevin Risden > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 3:43 AM Ignacio Vera wrote: > >> +1 >> >> >> SUCCESS! [1:13:16.262824] >> >> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 6:07 AM Shalin Shekhar Mangar < >> s

Re: Rethinking how we publish the Solr Ref Guide

Ah yes I assumed that the original link had come from a good source... OTOH https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/field-types-included-with-solr.html still needs to be updated to point to 8_2 I think. On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 1:01 PM Chris Hostetter wrote: > > : The redirection is wrong, if you re

Re: Rethinking how we publish the Solr Ref Guide

The redirection is wrong, if you remove "latest" from the urls with 8_1 in them it looks like you get the right page. Also, 8_2 is the latest now so these are also out of date I think. On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:24 AM Gézapeti wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I was trying to access > https://lucene.apa

Re: 8.3 release

> > > >>> I have documented the options on how to deal with that >>> immediately >>> > > in >>> > > > >>> that issue. I'll work to resolve the situation and cut a >>> branch as >>> > > > >>

Re: Rethinking how we publish the Solr Ref Guide

+1 to automate... I never use the PDF I'd be happy to loose it. The page count is the best part of the PDF :). As far as indexing the ref guide... Cassandra gave a talk on that last year... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DixlnxAk08s&list=PLU6n9Voqu_1HW8-VavVMa9lP8-oF8Oh5t&index=14 On Wed, Sep 18

Re: [POLL] Should notifications of NEW Jira issues go to dev@?

[ ] Leave it as is - I like quiet [x] A mail to dev@ for every new JIRA [x] One daily digest mail per day with a list of new JIRAs [ ] Other (explain): ___ On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:10 AM Jan Høydahl wrote: > Hi, > > The transition to issues@ and builds@ lists (LUCENE-8951) is no

Re: Welcome Atri Sharma as Lucene/Solr committer

Welcome :) On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 11:21 AM Kevin Risden wrote: > Congrats and welcome Atri! > > Kevin Risden > > > On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 11:05 AM Yonik Seeley wrote: > >> Congrats Atri! >> >> -Yonik >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 3:12 AM Adrien Grand wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Please j

Re: 8.3 release

I learned recently that it's actually all documented here: https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/8_1/how-to-contribute.html#ref-guide-publication-process On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 7:31 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Adrien, > Indeed, meant to write about starting a

Re: Notes from the committers' meeting at Activate 2019

mmits to GitBox for > those who favor those tools for any reason. > > But we can equally well embrace the entire GitHub tooling which was made > available to us by ASF earlier this year, and make that the de facto (and > primary documented) way of interacting with Lucene/Solr. > >

Re: Notes from the committers' meeting at Activate 2019

I wrote quickly and didn't expound much, let me clarify that my comments are in reference to having bug tracking in GitHub. Using the mirror doesn't bother me since the system of record is apache gitbox (the GitHub mirror is WAY better UI than gitbox). Having the record of what bugs were resolved i

Re: Notes from the committers' meeting at Activate 2019

"means pressuring people into accepting the github TOS" That's a really good point. Hadn't thought of that and it's definitely not ok to put github in control (or make them able to force a sudden burden of work when we don't like what they did). Apache should determine it's own destiny, and for th

Re: The Lucene Solr Gradle Build Game plan

I mentioned when we chatted at activate that I had a build in the past that was doing some pulling of gems... Looked back and it was actually using https://github.com/robfletcher/gradle-compass which was doing the gem management. Seems to use https://github.com/jruby-gradle/jruby-gradle-plugin to p

Re: Notes from the committers' meeting at Activate 2019

FWIW, One thing that needs to be figured out is how github would accommodate security issues (or how the process for those issues would change). Does github have the ability to assign roles and visibility (could be I haven't really worked with organizations on GitHub, all my clients have been on j

Re: 8.3 release

Sounds good to me except I think we need to make ref guide part of releases. We are now able to commit docs along with code and an issue should not be resolved and features not merged unless docs are in and ready for release. On Mon, Sep 16, 2019, 11:52 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya < ichattopadhy...@gm

Re: The Lucene Solr Gradle Build Game plan

, Sep 15, 2019 at 5:03 PM Mark Miller >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I've added more about that here: >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SOLR/Intro+to+the+Gradle+build >>>> >>>> It's configurable, but difficult for us t

Re: The Lucene Solr Gradle Build Game plan

Not sure if you heard, but about a half a dozen folks tried it out on macs and one on windows at the hack day on Tuesday before Activate. It caused some scrambling for sharing of power bricks (a single run of the tests eats 70% of a fully charged 2018 macbook pro battery in 45 min), but the good ne

[jira] [Assigned] (SOLR-13125) Optimize Queries when sorting by router.field

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-13125?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Gus Heck reassigned SOLR-13125: --- Assignee: Gus Heck > Optimize Queries when sorting by router.fi

[jira] [Commented] (SOLR-11492) More Modern cloud dev script

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11492?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16926689#comment-16926689 ] Gus Heck commented on SOLR-11492: - current versions living here until I get

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >