[+1]. It's way over due and time to move on to new technologies. I would
move to .Net 4.0 as by the time the Lucene.Net would be ready and
(somewhat) stable so will .Net 4.0
Alon Shwartz
CTO & co-founder
docstoc.com
al...@docstoc.com
o: (310) 255-1172
m: (818) 231-8191
f: (310) 255-1176
a: 409 Santa Monica Blvd, suite 2A
Santa Monica, CA 90401
blog: alonshwartz.com
twitter: twitter.com/alonsh
On 5/9/11 1:04 PM, "Troy Howard" <thowar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>All,
>
>Please cast your votes regarding the topic of .Net Framework support.
>
>The question on the table is:
>
>Should Apache Lucene.Net 2.9.4 be the last release which supports the
>.Net 2.0 Framework?
>
>Some options are:
>
>[+1] - Yes, move forward to the latest .Net Framework version, and drop
>support for 2.0 completely. New features and performance are more
>important
>than backwards compatibility.
>[0] - Yes, focus on the latest .Net Framework, but also include patches
>and/or preprocessor directives and conditional compilation blocks to
>include
>support for 2.0 when needed. New features, performance, and backwards
>compatibility are all equally important and it's worth the additional
>complexity and coding work to meet all of those goals.
>[-1] No, .Net Framework 2.0 should remain our target platform. Backwards
>compatibility is more important than new features and performance.
>
>
>This vote is not limited to the Apache Lucene.Net IPMC. All
>users/contributors/committers/mailing list lurkers are welcome to cast
>their
>votes with an equal weight. This has been cross posted to both the dev and
>user mailing lists.
>
>Thanks,
>Troy
