Hi all
Sharpen from db4o could maybe replace jlca
My 2cents...
Vincent
Le 1 nov. 2010 à 21:55, George Aroush a écrit :
Let me jump in here and offer some perspective about Lucene.Net
(btw, it's not Lucene.NET :-) ). This is based on my past
involvement with the project -- since 2003 whe
Upgrade solution to VS2010
--
Key: LUCENENET-377
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-377
Project: Lucene.Net
Issue Type: Task
Reporter: Jeffrey Cameron
VS2005 is quite out of date now an
what I found out from the converted source is interesting:
a) generics are used, for example in class Document.cs:
///Returns a List of all the fields in a document.
/// * Note that fields which are not are
/// * not available in documents retrieved from the
/// * index, e.g. or {...@
I tried Java to VB & C# Converter (Version 1.5, which I have, current
version is 2.1), the conversion took me about 1 minute, the converted files
were commented with the following number of issues:
WhatComment
Count
TODO TASK Anonymous inner classes are not converted to .NET:
52
We've already been through this process once before. Why repeat?
- Neal
-Original Message-
From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsing...@apache.org]
Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2010 6:38 AM
To: lucene-net-u...@lucene.apache.org
Cc: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org; Lucene mailing list
Subject:
We should not make the Lucene.NET project dependent on a specific IDE (VS2008,
VS2010, etc.) the source should builable from the tools available in the .NET
2.0 SDK or equivalent Mono tools.
- Neal
-Original Message-
From: Jeffrey Cameron (JIRA) [mailto:j...@apache.org]
Sent: Tuesday
Huh? What I should have been clear and concise to anyone who has follow the
project for the past several years.
Lucene.Net has already been through the official process of being promoted out
of incubator status. Why is it necessary to repeat this process?
The PMC failed to respond to the list
On Nov 2, 2010, at 1:20 PM, Granroth, Neal V. wrote:
>
> We've already been through this process once before. Why repeat?
Because clearly it didn't take the first time and this time the goal is to
demonstrate the community can stand on its own two feet as an Apache Top Level
Project (TLP).
I think IKVM already is a way, it's already working, so everybody can
download IKVM and use it together with Lucene.
But there is still a big need for Lucene.Net, it's a big difference if you
have a native solution or a "monster" with foreign classes, because the
whole java-runtime is also transla
Forking and going somewhere else certainly has the "grass is greener"
gleam to it.
The association with the much larger java Lucene community and the
expertise that community has (since the .NET community seems to be
mostly consumers of the tech, given the various comments about the
compl
If nothing else they (ASF) provide a swift kick in our collective behinds when
it's needed. And it's needed rather badly right now.
The last release of Lucene.Net was 2.9.2 in May. Lucene Java 2.9.2 and 3.0.1
were released in February and 2.9.3 and 3.0.2 were released in June. It's now
Novembe
DIGY,
I agree in that I am surprised that Lucene PMC has not been following the
on-going activity of the project. There has been significant activity after
George stepped away from the project and with his help I thought had taken the
project beyond incubator status.
While the ASF formal proc
Hi Everyone,
Rather than responding to each email, I will write up one response. The
points is in no significant order or priority.
1) IKVM: Since it doesn't give you source code, you end up with Java look
and fell, all the way from API to classes to exceptions. If this is
valuable option
On Nov 2, 2010, at 2:02 PM, Josh Handel wrote:
> One thing that has yet to be answered on this list is this :
>
> What does Apache Foundation provide, that the project does not received on
> its own OTHER than the name "Lucene".. I hear a lot of what Apache
> requests of us, beyond a name
14 matches
Mail list logo
