lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Hoss Man (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Created] (SOLR-5228) Don't require <field> or <dynamicField> be inside of <fields> -- or that <fieldType> be inside of <types>
Date Mon, 09 Sep 2013 23:06:51 GMT
Hoss Man created SOLR-5228:

             Summary: Don't require <field> or <dynamicField> be inside of <fields>
-- or that <fieldType> be inside of <types>
                 Key: SOLR-5228
             Project: Solr
          Issue Type: Improvement
          Components: Schema and Analysis
            Reporter: Hoss Man
            Assignee: Hoss Man

On the solr-user mailing list, Nutan recently mentioned spending days trying to track down
a problem that turned out to be because he had attempted to add a {{<dynamicField .. />}}
that was outside of the {{<fields>}} block in his schema.xml -- Solr was just silently
ignoring it.

We have made improvements in other areas of config validation by generating statup errors
when tags/attributes are found that are not expected -- but in this case i think we should
just stop expecting/requiring that the {{<fields>}} and {{<types>}} tags will
be used to group these sorts of things.  I think schema.xml parsing should just start ignoring
them and only care about finding the {{<field>}}, {{<dynamicField>}}, and {{<fieldType>}}
tags wherever they may be.

If people want to keep using them, fine.  If people want to mix fieldTypes and fields side
by side (perhaps specify a fieldType, then list all the fields using it) fine.  I don't see
any value in forcing people to use them, but we definitely shouldn't leave things the way
they are with otherwise perfectly valid field/type declarations being silently ignored.


I'll take this on unless i see any objections.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see:

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

View raw message