Dropping it completely from 1.4 seems a little too drastic to me, since the problem is with IE8 only. Bill
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 9:47 PM, Ryan McKinley <ryan...@gmail.com> wrote: > can we leave it in svn, but drop it from the release? logistically, > what is the best way to do this? Make a branch now, remove it from > /trunk, after release copy it from the branch back into /trunk? > > That seems like the best way to kick the can down the road. I agree > an off-the-shelf apache license jquery client is great. > > ryan > > > On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 9:13 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org> > wrote: > > Moving to GPL doesn't seem like a good solution to me, but I don't know > what > > else to propose. Why don't we just hold it from this release, but keep > it > > in trunk and encourage the Drupal guys and others to submit their > changes? > > Perhaps by then Matthias or you or someone else will have stepped up. > > > > On Sep 28, 2009, at 7:27 PM, Ryan McKinley wrote: > > > >> I just discussed this off-line with Matthias. It does not look like > >> he has the time to give this much attention now. (nor do I) > >> > >> We agreed that the best steps forward are to: > >> 1. Support the Drupal guys GPL port > >> 2. Archive the solrjs code to solrstuff.org > >> 3. Yank solrjs from apache svn (and 1.4 release) > >> 4. Add links to the drupal code (GPL) and the solrjs archive (Apache) > >> > >> Does this sound reasonable to everybody? > >> > >> ryan > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> Forwarded with permission from Peter Wolanin on a private thread. > >>> > >>> Begin forwarded message: > >>> > >>>> From: Peter Wolanin <peter.wola...@acquia.com> > >>>> Date: September 26, 2009 9:43:23 AM EDT > >>>> To: Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org> > >>>> > >>>> Subject: Re: 8 for 1.4 > >>>> > >>>> I talked to the guys reworking the JS library for Drupal at Drupalcon > >>>> - they are also having to fork potentially around license as much as > >>>> anything else, since they'd like to distribute via drupal.org, which > >>>> means they were hoping to get the original author to re-license the > >>>> code to them as GPL. > >>>> > >>>> -Peter > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org > > > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Argh, this was meant for solr-dev. > >>>>> > >>>>> Begin forwarded message: > >>>>> > >>>>>> From: Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org> > >>>>>> Date: September 25, 2009 1:34:32 PM EDT > >>>>>> To: solr-u...@lucene.apache.org > >>>>>> Subject: 8 for 1.4 > >>>>>> Reply-To: solr-u...@lucene.apache.org > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Y'all, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> We're down to 8 open issues: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/BrowseVersion.jspa?id=12310230&versionId=12313351&showOpenIssuesOnly=true > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 2 are packaging related, one is dependent on the official 2.9 > release > >>>>>> (so > >>>>>> should be taken care of today or tomorrow I suspect) and then we > have > >>>>>> a > >>>>>> few > >>>>>> others. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The only two somewhat major ones are S-1458, S-1294 (more on this in > a > >>>>>> mo') and S-1449. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On S-1294, the SolrJS patch, I yet again have concerns about even > >>>>>> including this, given the lack of activity (from Matthias, the > >>>>>> original > >>>>>> author and others) and the fact that some in the Drupal community > have > >>>>>> already forked this to fix the various bugs in it instead of just > >>>>>> submitting > >>>>>> patches. While I really like the idea of this library (jQuery is > >>>>>> awesome), > >>>>>> I have yet to see interest in the community to maintain it (unless > you > >>>>>> count > >>>>>> someone forking it and fixing the bugs in the fork as maintenance) > and > >>>>>> I'll > >>>>>> be upfront in admitting I have neither the time nor the patience to > >>>>>> debug > >>>>>> Javascript across the gazillions of browsers out there (I don't even > >>>>>> have IE > >>>>>> on my machine unless you count firing up a VM w/ XP on it) in the > >>>>>> wild. > >>>>>> Given what I know of most of the other committers here, I suspect > >>>>>> that > >>>>>> is > >>>>>> true for others too. At a minimum, I think S-1294 should be pushed > to > >>>>>> 1.5. > >>>>>> Next up, I think we consider pulling SolrJS from the release, but > >>>>>> keeping > >>>>>> it in trunk and officially releasing it with either 1.5 or 1.4.1, > >>>>>> assuming > >>>>>> its gotten some love in the meantime. If by then it has no love, I > >>>>>> vote > >>>>>> we > >>>>>> remove it and let the fork maintain it and point people there. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -Grant > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Peter M. Wolanin, Ph.D. > >>>> Momentum Specialist, Acquia. Inc. > >>>> peter.wola...@acquia.com > >>> > >>> -------------------------- > >>> Grant Ingersoll > >>> http://www.lucidimagination.com/ > >>> > >>> Search the Lucene ecosystem (Lucene/Solr/Nutch/Mahout/Tika/Droids) > using > >>> Solr/Lucene: > >>> http://www.lucidimagination.com/search > >>> > >>> > > > > -------------------------- > > Grant Ingersoll > > http://www.lucidimagination.com/ > > > > Search the Lucene ecosystem (Lucene/Solr/Nutch/Mahout/Tika/Droids) using > > Solr/Lucene: > > http://www.lucidimagination.com/search > > > > >
