lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael McCandless <>
Subject Re: Lucene's default settings & back compatibility
Date Tue, 19 May 2009 20:33:36 GMT
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Yonik Seeley
<> wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Michael McCandless
> <> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Yonik Seeley
>> <> wrote:
>>> Selecting backward compatibility vs latest and greatest could be done
>>> w/o Settings (a simple static int containing the version number to act
>>> like).  It seems like the Settings debate should be based on it's own
>>> merits.
>> But isn't a static int too restrictive?  That means all usage of
>> Lucene from within this JRE must match that version?
> Isn't that currently the case though?  One Lucene jar, one behavior.

Right, that's exactly why I want to fix it (only one behavior allowed
and so for all of 2.* we must match the 2.0 behavior).  We've come
full circle ;)

Ie the status quo is bad since we are forced to hurt new users in
order to preserve back compat, when presumably new users outnumber
back-compat users who are upgrading.

I'd love to default no-scoring when sorting by field, in 2.9, but I
can't, unless we had something along the lines of *Settings, or
"specify the version compat you require" when creating each class.


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

View raw message