Hi, 2008/8/6 Grant Ingersoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I'm less concerned about Lucene, but maybe that's b/c I live close to it. > Taking it out would mean a decent amount of rolling back. We will almost > certainly have a 1.3.1 release, etc. unless all goes swimmingly. Yes, it's good that lots of Solr people are also Lucene people. But I don't think that makes it alright to ship Lucene nightlies or snapshots. One of the reasons projects are pushed into doing releases is because of pressure from downstream projects who need stable releases for their own code. Therefore Solr should be gently exerting pressure on Lucene to do a stable release, in just the same way that some of us who depend on Solr are exerting pressure for a Solr release. If you short-circuit that process by saying "well, we know lucene so it's ok for us to use unstable builds", then there might never be a stable release of Lucene again (hyperbole and exaggeration, but you get my point). Another reason: say corporation X has a policy to use "only released software" (lots do). Developers at X could grab Solr 1.3 and use it without problem, but what if they were building a supercool tool Y that worked alongside Solr, but used only Lucene libraries. Clearly they would want to use the latest library, but they would be forced to only use the release, which practically guarantees headaches and interoperability problems between Solr and tool Y. It sucks to delay Solr 1.3, but perhaps we should all hope over to the Lucene mailing lists and start pushing for a stable release there? > Also, note 1.2 has Lucene dev JARs in it, not official releases... And had I been around when 1.2 was released, I'd have made the same arguments ;-) Andrew. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.andrewsavory.com/
