Yeah it is quite hideously long... OK I'll open a "wrapup flex branch" issue :)
Mike
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 6:07 PM, Michael Busch wrote:
> I just suggested it, because 1458 got sooo long. We could have new issues
> for cleanup and merging back to trunk.
>
> I don't have a strong preference abou
I just suggested it, because 1458 got sooo long. We could have new
issues for cleanup and merging back to trunk.
I don't have a strong preference about leaving it open or not though.
Michael
On 12/3/09 2:58 PM, Michael McCandless wrote:
Yeah I would say we leave it open.
There's also a good
You can also create a new issue "Merge flex branch into trunk" with fix
version 3.1 ;)
Michael
On 12/3/09 2:55 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
Why would we close it though? Doesn't it make sense to wait until its
merged into trunk ...
Michael Busch wrote:
OK, done!
I updated 1458 too. We can pr
Yeah I would say we leave it open.
There's also a good amount of fixing still (cleaning up the nocommits)
which likely should just go in under LUCENE-1458.
Mike
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
> Why would we close it though? Doesn't it make sense to wait until its
> merged in
Why would we close it though? Doesn't it make sense to wait until its
merged into trunk ...
Michael Busch wrote:
> OK, done!
>
> I updated 1458 too. We can probably resolve that one now and open more
> specific issues.
>
> Michael
>
> On 12/3/09 12:14 PM, Michael McCandless wrote:
>> +1, good ide
:busch...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 11:12 PM
> To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Patches for flex branch
>
> OK, done!
>
> I updated 1458 too. We can probably resolve that one now and open more
> specific issues.
>
> Michael
>
&g
OK, done!
I updated 1458 too. We can probably resolve that one now and open more
specific issues.
Michael
On 12/3/09 12:14 PM, Michael McCandless wrote:
+1, good idea!
Mike
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Michael Busch wrote:
I was thinking we could create a new version in Jira for
+1, good idea!
Mike
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Michael Busch wrote:
> I was thinking we could create a new version in Jira for the flex branch
> (that's what Hadoop HDFS is doing with their append branch). Then we can
> open new Jira issues with fix version=flex branch. It's getting a bit
>
I was thinking we could create a new version in Jira for the flex branch
(that's what Hadoop HDFS is doing with their append branch). Then we can
open new Jira issues with fix version=flex branch. It's getting a bit
confusing to always use 1458 for all changes :)
Michael
