+1 for committing it. Spring may be a pretty big undertaking for which we are not ready at this point in time. This patch should be incorporated in 1.3 so that at least the new features can take advantage of the simpler style. I'd even go as far as to suggest giving a uniform look to the entire solrconfig.xml if possible.
On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 10:03 PM, Yonik Seeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I could go either way on this.... > I agree with Grant that the "right" way to do things is to use > Spring... but that is in the future. Noble already has the code, so > the issue is to commit now or not. > I don't care much about getting an XSD for solrconfig myself, but others > may... > > Anyone else have thoughts on this? > -Yonik > > On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 11:54 AM, Chris Hostetter > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> : It is very hard to validate a config purely using an XSD. We have to >> : rely on the >> : components themselves to do a validation and I guess it is fine. >> >> agreed .. but it would be nice if (someday) you can at least check that a >> config is syntactically correct without running Solr ... an XSD can help >> with that. >> >> : user every day. According to me the user experience is the most >> : important thing. I don't really >> : care how many extra lines of code I write to achieve that >> >> I agree ... i'm just pointing out trade off. >> >> >> >> >> -Hoss >> >> > -- Regards, Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
