Thanks, updated.
DIGY
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
neal.granr...@thermofisher.com> wrote:
>
> I had no difficulty building it in Visual Studio 2005.
> The assembly copyright information appears to be out of date; shouldn't it
> read 2011 not 2009 ?
>
>
> - Neal
>
> -O
Yes. Once we're ready to call this revision an RC, it should be tagged as such.
Wyatt: Thanks for helping to test! Looking forward to your results.
Thanks,
Troy
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Granroth, Neal V.
wrote:
>
> No, the URL in DIGY's email apepars correct and the SVN revision appear
No, the URL in DIGY's email apepars correct and the SVN revision appears to be
1086410.
Question: Should there be a tag for Lucene.Net_2_9_4 as there are for previous
release candidates?
- Neal
-Original Message-
From: Wyatt Barnett [mailto:wyatt.barn...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, Apr
Thanks. For anyone watching, the corrected clickable link is
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lucene.net/trunk/C%23/.
Also, just to make sure we are looking at this right, the revision we
should be using is 1089138 -- main thing is I've been in and out of
town, not caught up on anything
Sorry, no binaries. You can download the source from
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lucene.net/trunk/C#/src/Lucene.Net
DIGY
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 12:12 AM, Wyatt Barnett wrote:
> Actually about to dive into a big search tweaking spike in a certain
> project here, happy to do it on 2
