1, 2016 6:02 AM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Is "solr.AnalyzerName" expansion supposed to work for
> Analyzers?
>
> I feel the total issue might be somewhat above my current code
> understanding, but I would be happy to do the grunt work for the
> factor
Uwe Schindler [mailto:u...@thetaphi.de]
>> Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2016 6:54 PM
>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: RE: Is "solr.AnalyzerName" expansion supposed to work for
>> Analyzers?
>>
>> Let's open an issue to do what I proposed! After that y
o:u...@thetaphi.de]
> Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2016 6:54 PM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Is "solr.AnalyzerName" expansion supposed to work for
> Analyzers?
>
> Let's open an issue to do what I proposed! After that you could add the
> schema editor
> Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2016 5:21 PM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Is "solr.AnalyzerName" expansion supposed to work for
> Analyzers?
>
> On Sat, 10 Sep 2016, at 04:03 PM, Uwe Schindler wrote:
> > To add,
> >
> > the manages sch
On Sat, 10 Sep 2016, at 04:03 PM, Uwe Schindler wrote:
> To add,
>
> the manages schema really makes it easy to "rewrite". My plan would be:
>
> - Add a new "type" or "name" attribute to schema.xml, which is contrary
> to "class" attribute usage
> - When a manages schema is loaded, the resolving
Thanks for this detailed answer.
On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 3:24 AM Uwe Schindler wrote:
> Hallo Alexandre,
>
> > I can't see a reason why it should be different, but:
> >
> > This works
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > This does not:
> >
>
3 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: u...@thetaphi.de
> -Original Message-
> From: Uwe Schindler [mailto:u...@thetaphi.de]
> Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2016 4:03 PM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org; Alexandre Rafalovitch <arafa...@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Is "solr
Hi,
The registry is there. To get all symbolic names of analyzer components in
classpath, use XxxFacrory.availableXxx() static methods.
I don't think it makes sense to replace all factories in solr with named SPIs.
But I'd suggest to add the type or name attribute to analysis components and
Wow Uwe,
Thanks for the treatise. That's an interesting discussion, but I
wonder if anything changed since?
In terms of user-confusion/migration, we now have managed schema and
can probably rewrite from 'solr.x' to symbol names on first use. That,
of course, requires some sort of registry of
Hallo Alexandre,
> I can't see a reason why it should be different, but:
>
> This works
>
>
>
>
>
>
> This does not:
>
>
>
>
> This does work again:
>
>
>
>
> Both LowerCaseTokenizerFactory and SimpleAnalyzer are in
I can't see a reason why it should be different, but:
This works
This does not:
This does work again:
Both LowerCaseTokenizerFactory and SimpleAnalyzer are in the same package.
Is this a bug or some sort of legacy
11 matches
Mail list logo