RE: Lucene.NET to .NET Core

2016-05-20 Thread Connie Yau
Hi Itamar, In regards to ICU4NET, we replaced ICU4NET with icu-dotnet (https://github.com/sillsdev/icu-dotnet). We decided to change the library because ICU4NET is a uses a small C++/CLI wrapper around the original library but there are currently no plans to move C++/CLI to cross-platform.

Re: Lucene.NET to .NET Core

2016-05-20 Thread Itamar Syn-Hershko
Hey there, Thank you so much again for your great work here. Lots of good contributions we could definitely use. Moving to xUnit.Net was actually on my list of things to do - basically also because it's API is much better and more flexible (and less buggy!) and my experience with it was much

Re: Lucene.NET to .NET Core

2016-05-20 Thread Laimonas Simutis
No objections here for the move to xUnit. The changes that are required to keep nunit in place did not sound pleasant. On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 2:56 AM, Elad Margalit wrote: > use xUnit, I personally prefer it over the NUnit. > there will be many replaces ([Test]->[Fact] for

[GitHub] lucenenet pull request: Adding a MergeScheduler that uses Tasks

2016-05-20 Thread synhershko
Github user synhershko commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/pull/171#issuecomment-220534914 Looks great, thanks for amazing work here. I left a few more minor comments, other than that LGTM and I'll merge soon --- If your project is set up for

Re: Lucene.NET to .NET Core

2016-05-20 Thread Elad Margalit
use xUnit, I personally prefer it over the NUnit. there will be many replaces ([Test]->[Fact] for instance), but I'm sure it can be done easily. On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 3:17 AM, Elizabeth Maher (NEWMAN) < elizabeth.ma...@microsoft.com> wrote: > Lucene.NET Community, > > Connie and I continue to