No pre/post processing involved. They are just to see how the output of
these tools looks like.
DIGY
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 11:36 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote:
>
> Also, was there any pre/post processing involved in these files? Was it
> manual / scripts etc? Just trying to get a feel for the work
The house CMS is brand spanking new, http://www.apache.org/dev/cms.html, and
from my understanding it is what ASF would like to move everything towards. It
looks flexible and easy to use, I really couldn't think of objections to using
it.I actually built the skeleton files required and was hopi
I did some learning about the details regarding project websites at the ASF.
Looks like there are a number of options available.
I looked over the websites for every Apache TLP and there are some
basic consistencies...
- Sites built with Apache Forrest (Lucene, Hadoop, WS)
- Sites built with Mave
I would lean towards open source conversion tools since having a robust one
would be useful beyond Lucene. I haven't dug into the sharpen code yet to
see what it would take but I could see creating our own fork of sharpen.
The original conversion I did had a little pre-processing just to get aroun
Here is a Sharpen conversion Alex Thompson did in November:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12459581/Lucene.Net.Sharpen20101114.zip
>From my understanding there was no pre/post processing done. I also believe
>it's 2.9.2, not 3.0.3 as Digy's are.
Here is the JIRA issue for the a
I'm pretty sure Tangible does provide free licenses to open source projects -
but they must be well and established, which I believe Lucene qualifies as.
Regarding the methodology - I think based on free open source tools isn't
required, as long as it's free to us, it should suit our purposes -
One thing to note... Neither of those conversions create buildable code.
The j2cstranslator version, for example, included Java language
constructions like "import", "throws", etc.. which of course don't
compile.
The Tangible one has over 300 errors of various types. It's unclear
how much manual
Grant,
Sounds great. We really appreciate your help!
Thanks,
Troy
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 11:50 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> I'll Champion, but I don't think I will have time to mentor. Once most of it
> is fleshed out, let's ask on gene...@incubator.a.o for mentors.
>
> -Grant
>
> On Dec 30,
For bug fix releases that need to come after a main release but can't
increment the version number, then a build number is ok, but generally
I prefer to just refer to them by name and revision number.
eg:
build 3.0.0.234 = 3.0.0 RTM (rev 100)
build 3.0.0.446 = 3.0.0 HotFix1 (rev 123)
etc...
Thi
I think Prescott explained it very well. I should not have specified a
tool. Any tool that enables a 100% automated conversion will meet our
needs.
What we need is a methodology for conversion which meets these criteria:
- Automated, Repeatable, and Well Documented (e.g. a script or build
task wit
The complicated part about having a release for release is that there might
be certain bugs that are only on our side, thus paying attention to the
build interval becomes important for people.
i.e.
build 3.0.0.234 = 3.0.0 release
build 3.0.0.446 = 3.0.0 hotfix
Is there a better way of handling o
Also, was there any pre/post processing involved in these files? Was it manual
/ scripts etc? Just trying to get a feel for the work involved.
> From: digyd...@gmail.com
> To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Proposal Stage: Backwards Compatibility / Support
> Date: Sun, 2 Jan 20
I think the 100% Sharpen is more to mean, it should be 100% automatic
conversion including pre/post processing scripts so that future translations
can be quick, easy, and as error free as possible. If you replace 100% Sharpen
with 100% Java 2 CSharp Translator I think Troy's intent stands.
As f
> The 3.0.X ports should be 100% Sharpen
Why?
What about other alternatives?
Lucene.java 3.0.3 ==> .Net Conversion Samples (
http://people.apache.org/~digy/Lucene.Net.3.0.3.zip )
DIGY
-Original Message-
From: Troy Howard [mailto:thowar...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2011 1
I'll Champion, but I don't think I will have time to mentor. Once most of it
is fleshed out, let's ask on gene...@incubator.a.o for mentors.
-Grant
On Dec 30, 2010, at 6:32 PM, Troy Howard wrote:
> Grant,
>
> I'm working on the proposal and have come to the final section where I
> must list
15 matches
Mail list logo
