lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Otis Gospodnetic <>
Subject Re: compatibility of Lucene 1.9
Date Wed, 09 Nov 2005 19:01:00 GMT
> > If not, then our next release version should just be 2.0 and skip  
> > 1.9, don't ya think?

As other said - we want 1.9 + 2.0 so we can clean up deprecated stuff.

> FWIW... One reason I haven't been persistent or hurried about the  
> UTF-8-clean/speedup patches is because they aren't backwards  
> compatible, and thus should not be considered prior to a 1.9  
> release.  The other is that I suspect that given sufficient effort,  
> byte-count Lucene strings will win out over char-chount Lucene  
> strings -- we'll know after I tinker with the merge process and  
> submit a diff.  Again, I haven't been rushing -- I'm finishing up the
> Perl/C port of the org.apache.lucene.index package to familiarize  
> myself with all the nooks and crannies first.
> If you go directly to 2.0, when will the next opportunity be to  
> introduce a backwards-compatibility-killing index format change?

I think 2.1 or 2 is a fair game.

I believe 1.4.3 -> 1.9 indices are compatible.  Just scanned
CHANGES.txt for index incompatibility notes the other day and didn't
find any.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message