patrick o'leary wrote: > Someone pulling an Al Gore (inventing the internet) on this isn't my > concern, heck you can just google for some of the class names of > locallucene and see how far spread it is, Then whats this about:
" but it's giving significant, 'impression of ownership' of a lot of work that's been completed by other folks." > what I am more concerned about > > "Future versions of these patches may include support for search with > regular polygons, and the introduction of distance facets, allowing Solr > users to be able to filter their results based on the calculated distances." > > They're now 'flogging' recent and current work I and others are doing? > > ... not encouraging, and certainly not healthy for open source. > Doesn't sound that way to me. > I'm going to be brash and request that there is commitment to adding a basic > Spatial feature set for distance searching (restricted by distance) & > sorting > to Solr's trunk by the end of December. Iterate and refactor as needed after > that. > > There should not be any more excuses to having this code out in the cold as > patches and external projects. > But your doing that yourself at source forge? Hasn't there been a lot of work on an external LocalLucene, even after it was put into contrib? While the contrib version was left in a fairly hairy state? Thats just the nature of the license - but putting LocalLucene into contrib hasn't appeared to help much. > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 8:48 AM, Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Yonik Seeley wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 11:22 AM, patrick o'leary <pj...@pjaol.com> >>> >> wrote: >> >>>> What spatial contributions have been contributed from this? >>>> I'm only seeing some query parsing / multi-threading extensions, no >>>> >> shapes / >> >>>> SRID's etc >>>> but it's giving significant, 'impression of ownership' of a lot of work >>>> that's been completed >>>> by other folks. >>>> >>>> >>> Looks like they acknowledge building on local solr and local lucene to >>> >> me: >> >>> """SSP started out its life as a patch for Solr Spatial Search >>> (Solr-773) and Spatial Lucene (Lucene-1732) and extends Solr and >>> Lucene with hereunto missing geodetic search functions (bounding boxes >>> etc) while improving on the speed of the result and performance when >>> dealing with a large data set through better query parsing and >>> multi-threaded filtering. Also included are improved extensibility and >>> documentation.""" >>> >>> And in a way, they do "own" their plugin - their customizations, >>> packaging, etc (note: I haven't looked at it). And they offer support >>> for it - which might be attractive to some companies that need >>> supported geosearch now. >>> >>> It's also open source under the Apache license, so presumably we could >>> borrow anything we want from it. >>> >>> -Yonik >>> http://www.lucidimagination.com >>> >>> >> I think Patrick is obviously referring to: However, in the last 6 months >> support for spatial search has begun to be added to Apache Lucene and >> Solr, much of which has been developed here at JTeam. >> >> "Much of which" is obviously a bit of an overstatement (to a great >> degree or extent) when you look at all the work thats been done. >> >> Oh well though. So it goes. Its Apache - they could package it all up, >> hide the code under the covers, put a notice saying some work was >> derived from Solr, call it Solr: geo search edition, and essentially >> take even more credit while adding little to nothing. I wouldn't sweat it. >> >> > >
