[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1688?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12794734#action_12794734
]
Yonik Seeley commented on SOLR-1688:
------------------------------------
I'm against making all ValueSource classes public. Some of them will clearly
be implementations very specific to a FieldType, and those implementation
details shouldn't be exposed unless needed.
bq. the placement of ValueSource and FieldCacheSource in the
o.a.solr.search.function package suggests that these classes and their children
likely belong in that package
No, the implementation of FieldType.getValueSource() is up to that FieldType
and it can make perfect sense to be co-located (esp if it's an implementation
detail of the FieldType).
> Inner class FieldCacheSources should be refactored into their own classes
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-1688
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1688
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: search
> Affects Versions: 1.4
> Environment: indep. of env.
> Reporter: Chris A. Mattmann
> Fix For: 1.5
>
> Attachments: SOLR-1688.Mattmann.122609.patch.txt
>
>
> While working on SOLR-1586 I noticed that outside of class level access (or
> package level), you can't really reference FieldCacheSources that are defined
> inside of their FieldType constituents (e.g., in the case of StrFieldSource
> as defined in StrField). What's more troubling is that the
> FieldType/FieldCacheSources are defined in an inconsistent fashion: some are
> done as inner classes, e.g., StrFieldSource and SortableFloatFieldSource,
> while others are defined as individual classes (e.g., FloatFIeldSource). This
> patch will make them all consistent and define each FieldCacheSource as an
> outside class, present in o.a.solr.search.function.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
