Re: Incubator Proposal Draft

I don't know how much of the following of the following should be included in the proposal, but its probably worth starting discussions on separate threads: *Branding/Marketing,* *Documentation, * *.Net API* *Backwards Compatibility & Support * *Linq/WCF/Annotations* * * On Thu, Dec 30, 2

Proposal Stage: PR/Marketing/Branding

*PR/Marketing/Branding:* Even open source need this. Its never something totally the forefront on the developers mind, but its going to be key in order to build a community. The main part of marketing to strategically build connections between people and a product/service so that they associate a

Proposal Stage: Backwards Compatibility / Support

*Backwards Compatibility / Support: * This is definitely something we need to cover. I'm guessing the obvious choice would be to continue the 2.9.X versions under sharpen, maintain the current api thats has java idioms so that people can continue to use it, release patches, ensure stability with t

Proposal Stage: Net Idiomatic Api Version

*Net Idiomatic Api Version* *We should probably be looking for with this criteria is readability & getting people familiar with any new code base faster within their own Idiom. * * * Starting with a proposal that we use the internal Ms coding guidelines

Proposal Stage: Documentation

*Last one for the year, See ya next year & Happy New Year to all.* * * *Documentation.* * * Who should be responsible for this? Where should it live? Wiki or should we have a separate site that aggregates. blogs, twitter feeds, facebook, tutorials, wiki, documentation, etc? I propose that we hav

RE: Initial committers list for Incubator Proposal

I haven't actually used Lucene.Net that much but I expect I will in the future. I guess I will classify myself as a contributor. I'm a .Net developer of several years working as a consultant on enterprise projects. I did the test port of lucene using sharpen and am willing to do the java work of im

RE: Proposal Stage: Backwards Compatibility / Support

Maybe we could just bug-fix support the current 2.9.2 codebase unless people really need something in 2.9.x I think there would be a 3.0.x line-by-line port and a 3.0.x idiomatic version. I'd like to throw another idea into the mix which is perhaps the idiomatic version could be created by an aut

Re: Proposal Stage: Backwards Compatibility / Support

We are inheriting the outstanding issues facing the Lucene.Net project. This includes remaining committed to providing a line-by-line port that stays in sync with the Java Lucene releases. The project is currently extremely behind schedule on this. The 2.9.2 code base, which is widely used and th

Re: Proposal Stage: Documentation

I have been impressed by Prescott Nasser's work in this area. I would like to nominate him for managing documentation. That includes leading the discussion on how to proceed with documentation. One thing that is unclear to me at this point are the details of the project website. I don't know how

Re: Proposal Stage: Net Idiomatic Api Version

I agree with the suggestion to follow the MS Coding standard. It's a good general guideline. Specifically, I'd like to follow all guidelines put forth in the book: Framework Design Guidelines: Conventions, Idioms, and Patterns for Reusable .NET Libraries by Krzysztof Cwalina and Brad Abrams http:/

RE: Initial committers list for Incubator Proposal

There are a number of out of the box projects that I think should be developed as we have time that will help facilitate new people getting started, be used as examples and templates, and give us some good stuff to blog about :). This all goes to the marketing/PR/Community stuff that was sent o