On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 23:13 -0400, Ryan McKinley wrote:
Hey-
Rather then continually point to solr 2.0 as a future future thing,
i'd like to give a go at removing all configs and deprecated stuff. --
I doubt that would end up being the real direction, but as an exercise
would be quite
+1. Seems a bit easier/faster than JIRA+Patch+Apply.
Otis
--
Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch
- Original Message
From: Grant Ingersoll [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Friday, October 3, 2008 6:02:21 AM
Subject: Re: solr 2.0 branch
: perhaps:
: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/solr/branches/sandbox/
: or
: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/solr/branches/sandbox/ryan/
:
: thoughts?
my personal prefrnece would be to keep branches like this named after a
specific goal, rather then generic (ie just /sandbox) or
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 11:13 PM, Ryan McKinley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rather then continually point to solr 2.0 as a future future thing, i'd like
to give a go at removing all configs and deprecated stuff. -- I doubt that
would end up being the real direction, but as an exercise would be
Hey-
Rather then continually point to solr 2.0 as a future future thing,
i'd like to give a go at removing all configs and deprecated stuff. --
I doubt that would end up being the real direction, but as an exercise
would be quite valuable to figure out what the major issues will be
and
