As with all OSS projects, In the end of day it really boils down to the community. How big it is, and how active it is.
I know for a fact Lucene.NET has a vast amount of users, including big projects you all know (Nuget, RavenDB, Umbraco, and more) and in big companies (several teams in Microsoft are using and also have contributed code, for example). But the amount of active participants is very small, and this is the main reason why we haven't made a release lately. Launching a new project that will allow to run Java Lucene via any CLR wrapper for Java will run into the exact same issues. All code requires maintenance. In fact, I spoke about exactly that a few months ago at .NET Fringe https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyhRwbiwgv0 We are making good progress and will eventually get to a 4.8 release, but without more help from the community it will take us some time to get there. And as I mentioned in the video, I find it utterly ridiculous that companies are making money out of this OSS project for years now and don't contribute back a single dime (or man hours). This, for sure, is a way to make a project die. My $0.02. -- Itamar Syn-Hershko http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko> Freelance Developer & Consultant Lucene.NET committer and PMC member On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Bart Czernicki < [email protected]> wrote: > There definitely is a need for local in-process search technology that is > not REST based. .NET developers have plenty of options there: Solr, > ElasticSearch, Azure Search (on MSFT cloud). The network latency, https > protocol and serialization/deserialization together are never going to be > faster than in-process search. > > > > Lucene 4.x has some great improvements in search and faceting that would > be great to have. I see this request come up a lot. > > > > [image: Image] <http://azure.microsoft.com/> > > * Bart Czernicki* > > Cloud Solution Architect | Azure SaaS ISV Solutions > > 609.519.2060 | [email protected] | Why Azure? > <http://www.windowsazure.com/en-us/overview/case-studies/> > > > > > > *From:* Michael D Gorsich [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 26, 2016 8:50 AM > *To:* [email protected] > > *Subject:* Re: Next sync release Lucene.net > > > > Could it be it works so well there just isn't much broad-based need for > change? Don't the newer changes to Lucene tend to cover more specialized > needs, with correspondingly fewer developers willing to work on it, or > needing the functions? > > I know for our org's needs Lucene 3.0.3 seems perfect as-is. > > > *Michael Gorsich Senior Developer, DTE Energy - ITS* > 734.586.1531 (Fermi 2) > [email protected] > > > [image: Inactive hide details for "Michael O'Shea" ---2016.01.26 > 08:28:28---I managed to integrate Lucene.Net into a content > post-proce]"Michael > O'Shea" ---2016.01.26 08:28:28---I managed to integrate Lucene.Net into a > content post-processing system on an Azure worker process. > > From: "Michael O'Shea" <[email protected]> > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Date: 2016.01.26 08:28 > Subject: Re: Next sync release Lucene.net > ------------------------------ > > > > > I managed to integrate Lucene.Net into a content post-processing system on > an Azure worker process. > > I would be sad to see Lucene.Net go but it is true that there seems to be > very little uptake for the project. Weird. > > Michael > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Erik Hatcher <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Or via HTTP? Solr! :) > > > > > On Jan 26, 2016, at 06:08, Allan, Brad (Bracknell) < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > This question sparked a thought.... > > > I wonder if it's time to think about an alternate way to make Lucene > > available to the .NET community - some sort of JNI wrapper? > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Nimesh Dhruve [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] > > > Sent: 25 January 2016 18:17 > > > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: Next sync release Lucene.net > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I am wondering if there is any active development for Lucene.net going > > on to keep it sync with Java Lucene and if so when is the next release > for > > Lucene.net planned? > > > > > > Regards, > > > Nimesh > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > CheckFree Solutions Limited (trading as Fiserv) > > > Registered Office: Eversheds House, 70 Great Bridgewater Street, > > Manchester, M15 ES > > > Registered in England: No. 2694333 > > >
