Some back discussion:
http://www.lucidimagination.com/search/document/79b65c358374d10/jira_convention_resolved_vs_closed
I've seen people say just resolve (don't close) as well in other
discussions.
The way we do things, I don't really think it matters either way. JIRA
is used fairly loosely with Lucene/Solr.
Grant Ingersoll wrote:
I always thought that was the thing to do. It was an indication that
the solution has been applied and has proven itself to be correct,
versus resolved just meaning it was applied and the author thought it
was taken care of.
On Aug 13, 2009, at 2:21 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
Why are we moving things from resolved to closed? It seems unnecessary.
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Grant Ingersoll
(JIRA)<[email protected]> wrote:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-475?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Grant Ingersoll closed SOLR-475.
--------------------------------
Assignee: Yonik Seeley
multi-valued faceting via un-inverted field
-------------------------------------------
Key: SOLR-475
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-475
Project: Solr
Issue Type: New Feature
Reporter: Yonik Seeley
Assignee: Yonik Seeley
Fix For: 1.4
Attachments: facet_performance.html, SOLR-475.patch,
SOLR-475.patch, UnInvertedField.java, UnInvertedField.java
Facet multi-valued fields via a counting method (like the
FieldCache method) on an un-inverted representation of the field.
For each doc, look at it's terms and increment a count for that term.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
--
- Mark
http://www.lucidimagination.com
