lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Uwe Schindler" <...@thetaphi.de>
Subject RE: Lucene/Solr 8.0
Date Tue, 08 Jan 2019 09:10:59 GMT
Hi,

 

I will start and add the branch_8x jobs to Jenkins once I have some time later today.

 

The question: How to proceed with branch_7x? Should we stop using it and release 7.6.x only
(so we would use branch_7_6 only for bugfixes), or are we planning to one more Lucene/Solr
7.7? In the latter case I would keep the jenkins jobs enabled for a while.

 

Uwe

 

-----

Uwe Schindler

Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen

http://www.thetaphi.de <http://www.thetaphi.de/> 

eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de

 

From: Alan Woodward <romseygeek@gmail.com> 
Sent: Monday, January 7, 2019 11:30 AM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Lucene/Solr 8.0

 

OK, Christmas caught up with me a bit… I’ve just created a branch for 8x from master,
and am in the process of updating the master branch to version 9.  New commits that should
be included in the 8.0 release should also be back-ported to branch_8x from master.

 

This is not intended as a feature freeze, as I know there are still some things being worked
on for 8.0; however, it should let us clean up master by removing as much deprecated code
as possible, and give us an idea of any replacement work that needs to be done.





On 19 Dec 2018, at 15:13, David Smiley <david.w.smiley@gmail.com <mailto:david.w.smiley@gmail.com>
> wrote:

 

January.

 

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 2:04 AM S G <sg.online.email@gmail.com <mailto:sg.online.email@gmail.com>
> wrote:

It would be nice to see Solr 8 in January soon as there is an enhancement on nested-documents
we are waiting to get our hands on.

Any idea when Solr 8 would be out ?

 

Thx

SG

 

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 1:34 PM David Smiley <david.w.smiley@gmail.com <mailto:david.w.smiley@gmail.com>
> wrote:

I see 10 JIRA issues matching this filter:   project in (SOLR, LUCENE) AND priority = Blocker
and status = open and fixVersion = "master (8.0)" 

   click here:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20in%20(SOLR%2C%20LUCENE)%20AND%20priority%20%3D%20Blocker%20and%20status%20%3D%20open%20and%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%22master%20(8.0)%22%20

 

Thru the end of the month, I intend to work on those issues not yet assigned. 

 

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 4:51 AM Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com <mailto:jpountz@gmail.com>
> wrote:

+1

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 10:38 AM Alan Woodward <romseygeek@gmail.com <mailto:romseygeek@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Now that 7.6 is out of the door (thanks Nick!) we should think about cutting the 8.0
branch and moving master to 9.0.  I’ll volunteer to create the branch this week - say Wednesday?
 Then we should have some time to clean up the master branch and uncover anything that still
needs to be done on 8.0 before we start the release process next year.
>
> On 22 Oct 2018, at 18:12, Cassandra Targett <casstargett@gmail.com <mailto:casstargett@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> I'm a bit delayed, but +1 on the 7.6 and 8.0 plan from me too.
>
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 7:18 AM Erick Erickson <erickerickson@gmail.com <mailto:erickerickson@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> +1, this gives us all a chance to prioritize getting the blockers out
>> of the way in a careful manner.
>> On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 7:56 AM jim ferenczi <jim.ferenczi@gmail.com <mailto:jim.ferenczi@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> >
>> > +1 too. With this new perspective we could create the branch just after the
7.6 release and target the 8.0 release for January 2019 which gives almost 3 month to finish
the blockers ?
>> >
>> > Le jeu. 18 oct. 2018 à 23:56, David Smiley <david.w.smiley@gmail.com <mailto:david.w.smiley@gmail.com>
> a écrit :
>> >>
>> >> +1 to a 7.6 —lots of stuff in there
>> >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 4:47 PM Nicholas Knize <nknize@gmail.com <mailto:nknize@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> If we're planning to postpone cutting an 8.0 branch until a few weeks
from now then I'd like to propose (and volunteer to RM) a 7.6 release targeted for late November
or early December (following the typical 2 month release pattern). It feels like this might
give a little breathing room for finishing up 8.0 blockers? And looking at the change log
there appear to be a healthy list of features, bug fixes, and improvements to both Solr and
Lucene that warrant a 7.6 release? Personally I wouldn't mind releasing the LatLonShape encoding
changes in LUCENE-8521 and selective indexing work done in LUCENE-8496. Any objections or
thoughts?
>> >>>
>> >>> - Nick
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 5:32 AM Đạt Cao Mạnh <caomanhdat317@gmail.com
<mailto:caomanhdat317@gmail.com> > wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thanks Cassandra and Jim,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I created a blocker issue for Solr 8.0 SOLR-12883, currently in
jira/http2 branch there are a draft-unmature implementation of SPNEGO authentication which
enough to makes the test pass, this implementation will be removed when SOLR-12883 gets resolved
. Therefore I don't see any problem on merging jira/http2 to master branch in the next week.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 2:33 AM jim ferenczi <jim.ferenczi@gmail.com
<mailto:jim.ferenczi@gmail.com> > wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> > But if you're working with a different assumption - that
just the existence of the branch does not stop Dat from still merging his work and the work
being included in 8.0 - then I agree, waiting for him to merge doesn't need to stop the creation
of the branch.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Yes that's my reasoning. This issue is a blocker so we won't
release without it but we can work on the branch in the meantime and let other people work
on new features that are not targeted to 8.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Le mer. 17 oct. 2018 à 20:51, Cassandra Targett <casstargett@gmail.com
<mailto:casstargett@gmail.com> > a écrit :
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> OK - I was making an assumption that the timeline for the
first 8.0 RC would be ASAP after the branch is created.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> It's a common perception that making a branch freezes adding
new features to the release, perhaps in an unofficial way (more of a courtesy rather than
a rule). But if you're working with a different assumption - that just the existence of the
branch does not stop Dat from still merging his work and the work being included in 8.0 -
then I agree, waiting for him to merge doesn't need to stop the creation of the branch.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> If, however, once the branch is there people object to Dat
merging his work because it's "too late", then the branch shouldn't be created yet because
we want to really try to clear that blocker for 8.0.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Cassandra
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 12:13 PM jim ferenczi <jim.ferenczi@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Ok thanks for answering.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> > - I think Solr needs a couple more weeks since
the work Dat is doing isn't quite done yet.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> We can wait a few more weeks to create the branch but
I don't think that one action (creating the branch) prevents the other (the work Dat is doing).
>> >>>>>>> HTTP/2 is one of the blocker for the release but it
can be done in master and backported to the appropriate branch as any other feature ? We just
need an issue with the blocker label to ensure that
>> >>>>>>> we don't miss it ;). Creating the branch early would
also help in case you don't want to release all the work at once in 8.0.0.
>> >>>>>>> Next week was just a proposal, what I meant was soon
because we target a release in a few months.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Le mer. 17 oct. 2018 à 17:52, Cassandra Targett <casstargett@gmail.com
<mailto:casstargett@gmail.com> > a écrit :
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> IMO next week is a bit too soon for the branch -
I think Solr needs a couple more weeks since the work Dat is doing isn't quite done yet.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Solr needs the HTTP/2 work Dat has been doing, and
he told me yesterday he feels it is nearly ready to be merged into master. However, it does
require a new release of Jetty to Solr is able to retain Kerberos authentication support (Dat
has been working with that team to help test the changes Jetty needs to support Kerberos with
HTTP/2). They should get that release out soon, but we are dependent on them a little bit.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> He can hopefully reply with more details on his
status and what else needs to be done.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Once Dat merges his work, IMO we should leave it
in master for a little bit. While he has been beasting and testing with Jenkins as he goes
along, I think it would be good to have all the regular master builds work on it for a little
bit also.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Of the other blockers, the only other large-ish
one is to fully remove Trie* fields, which some of us also discussed yesterday and it seemed
we concluded that Solr isn't really ready to do that. The performance issues with single value
lookups are a major obstacle. It would be nice if someone with a bit more experience with
that could comment in the issue (SOLR-12632) and/or unmark it as a blocker.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Cassandra
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 8:38 AM Erick Erickson <erickerickson@gmail.com
<mailto:erickerickson@gmail.com> > wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> I find 9 open blockers for 8.0:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20SOLR%20AND%20priority%20%3D%20Blocker%20AND%20status%20%3D%20OPEN
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> As David mentioned, many of the SOlr committers
are at Activate, which
>> >>>>>>>>> ends Thursday so feedback (and work) may be
a bit delayed.
>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 8:11 AM David Smiley
<david.w.smiley@gmail.com <mailto:david.w.smiley@gmail.com> > wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> > Hi,
>> >>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> > Thanks for volunteering to do the 8.0 release
Jim!
>> >>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> > Many of us are at the Activate Conference
in Montreal.  We had a committers meeting where we discussed some of the blockers.  I think
only a couple items were raised.  I'll leave Dat to discuss the one on HTTP2.  On the Solr
nested docs front, I articulated one and we mostly came to a decision on how to do it.  It's
not "hard" just a matter of how to hook in some functionality so that it's user-friendly.
 I'll file an issue for this.  Inexplicably I'm sheepish about marking issues "blocker" but
I shouldn't be.  I'll file that issue and look at another issue or two that ought to be blockers.
 Nothing is "hard" or tons of work that is in my sphere of work.
>> >>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> > On the Lucene side, I will commit https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7875
RE MultiFields either late tonight or tomorrow when I have time.  It's ready to be committed;
just sitting there.  It's a minor thing but important to make this change now before 8.0.
>> >>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> > I personally plan to spend more time on
the upcoming weeks on a few of these 8.0 things.
>> >>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> > ~ David
>> >>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 4:21 AM jim ferenczi
<jim.ferenczi@gmail.com <mailto:jim.ferenczi@gmail.com> > wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>> >> Hi,
>> >>>>>>>>> >> We still have two blockers for the
Lucene 8 release:
>> >>>>>>>>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7075?jql=(project%3D%22Lucene%20-%20Core%22%20%20OR%20project%3DSOLR)%20AND%20priority%3DBlocker%20and%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20
>> >>>>>>>>> >> We're planning to work on these issues
in the coming days, are there any other blockers (not in the list) on Solr side.
>> >>>>>>>>> >> Now that Lucene 7.5 is released I'd
like to create a Lucene 8 branch soon (next week for instance ? ). There are some work to
do to make sure that all tests pass, add the new version...
>> >>>>>>>>> >> I can take care of it if there are
no objections. Creating the branch in advance would help to stabilize this version (people
can continue to work on new features that are not targeted for 8.0) and
>> >>>>>>>>> >> we can discuss the best date for the
release when all blockers are resolved. What do you think ?
>> >>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>> >> Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 à 11:32, Adrien
Grand <jpountz@gmail.com <mailto:jpountz@gmail.com> > a écrit :
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>> Đạt, is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12639
the right issue for HTTP/2 support? Should we make it a blocker for 8.0?
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>> Le lun. 3 sept. 2018 à 23:37,
Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com <mailto:jpountz@gmail.com> > a écrit :
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> For the record here is the
JIRA query for blockers that Erick referred to: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12720?jql=(project%3D%22Lucene%20-%20Core%22%20%20OR%20project%3DSOLR)%20AND%20priority%3DBlocker%20and%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> Le lun. 3 sept. 2018 à 10:36,
jim ferenczi <jim.ferenczi@gmail.com <mailto:jim.ferenczi@gmail.com> > a écrit
:
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Ok thanks Đạt and Erick.
I'll follow the blockers on Jira.  Đạt do you have an issue opened for the HTTP/2 support
?
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Le ven. 31 août 2018 à
16:40, Erick Erickson <erickerickson@gmail.com <mailto:erickerickson@gmail.com> >
a écrit :
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> There's also the issue
of what to do as far as removing Trie* support.
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> I think there's a blocker
JIRA.
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> project = SOLR AND
priority = Blocker AND resolution = Unresolved
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Shows 6 blockers
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018
at 4:12 AM Đạt Cao Mạnh <caomanhdat317@gmail.com <mailto:caomanhdat317@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> > Hi Jim,
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> > I really want
to introduce the support of HTTP/2 into Solr 8.0 (currently cooked in jira/http2 branch).
The changes of that branch are less than Star Burst effort and closer to be merged into master
branch.
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> > Thanks!
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> > On Fri, Aug 31,
2018 at 3:55 PM jim ferenczi <jim.ferenczi@gmail.com <mailto:jim.ferenczi@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> Hi all,
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> I'd like to
get some feedback regarding the upcoming Lucene/Solr 8 release. There are still some cleanups
and docs to add on the Lucene side but it seems that all blockers are resolved.
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> From a Solr
perspective are there any important changes that need to be done or are we still good with
the October target for the release ? Adrien mentioned the Star Burst effort some time ago,
is it something that is planned for 8 ?
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> Cheers,
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> Jim
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> Le mer. 1
août 2018 à 19:02, David Smiley <david.w.smiley@gmail.com <mailto:david.w.smiley@gmail.com>
> a écrit :
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> Yes, that
new BKD/Points based code is definitely something we want in 8 or 7.5 -- it's a big deal.
 I think it would also be awesome if we had highlighter that could use the Weight.matches()
API -- again for either 7.5 or 8.  I'm working on this on the UnifiedHighlighter front and
Alan from other aspects.
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> ~ David
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> On Wed,
Aug 1, 2018 at 12:51 PM Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com <mailto:jpountz@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> I
was hoping that we would release some bits of this new support for geo shapes in 7.5 already.
We are already very close to being able to index points, lines and polygons and query for
intersection with an envelope. It would be nice to add support for other relations (eg. disjoint)
and queries (eg. polygon) but the current work looks already useful to me.
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> Le
mer. 1 août 2018 à 17:00, Robert Muir <rcmuir@gmail.com <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com>
> a écrit :
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
My only other suggestion is we may want to get Nick's shape stuff into
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
the sandbox module at least for 8.0 so that it can be tested out. I
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
think it looks like that wouldn't delay any October target though?
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:51 AM, Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com <mailto:jpountz@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
> I'd like to revive this thread now that these new optimizations for
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
> collection of top docs are more usable and enabled by default in
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
> IndexSearcher (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8060). Any
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
> feedback about starting to work towards releasing 8.0 and targeting October
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
> 2018?
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
> Le jeu. 21 juin 2018 à 09:31, Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com <mailto:jpountz@gmail.com>
> a écrit :
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> Hi Robert,
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> I agree we need to make it more usable before 8.0. I would also like to
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> improve ReqOptSumScorer (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8204)
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> to leverage impacts so that queries that incorporate queries on feature
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> fields (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8197) in an optional
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> clause are also fast.
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> Le jeu. 21 juin 2018 à 03:06, Robert Muir <rcmuir@gmail.com <mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com>
> a écrit :
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> How can the end user actually use the biggest new feature: impacts and
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> BMW? As far as I can tell, the issue to actually implement the
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> necessary API changes (IndexSearcher/TopDocs/etc) is still open and
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> unresolved, although there are some interesting ideas on it. This
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> seems like a really big missing piece, without a proper API, the stuff
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> is not really usable. I also can't imagine a situation where the API
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> could be introduced in a followup minor release because it would be
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> too invasive.
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 1:19 PM, Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com <mailto:jpountz@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > Hi all,
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > I would like to start discussing releasing Lucene/Solr 8.0. Lucene 8
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > already
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > has some good changes around scoring, notably cleanups to
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > similarities[1][2][3], indexing of impacts[4], and an implementation of
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > Block-Max WAND[5] which, once combined, allow to run queries faster
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > when
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > total hit counts are not requested.
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8116
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8020
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8007
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4198
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8135
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > In terms of bug fixes, there is also a bad relevancy bug[6] which is
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > only in
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > 8.0 because it required a breaking change[7] to be implemented.
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > [6] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8031
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > [7] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8134
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > As usual, doing a new major release will also help age out old codecs,
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > which
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > in-turn make maintenance easier: 8.0 will no longer need to care about
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > the
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > fact that some codecs were initially implemented with a random-access
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > API
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > for doc values, that pre-7.0 indices encoded norms differently, or that
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > pre-6.2 indices could not record an index sort.
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > I also expect that we will come up with ideas of things to do for 8.0
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > as we
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > feel that the next major is getting closer. In terms of planning, I was
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > thinking that we could target something like october 2018, which would
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > be
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > 12-13 months after 7.0 and 3-4 months from now.
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > From a Solr perspective, the main change I'm aware of that would be
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > worth
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > releasing a new major is the Star Burst effort. Is it something we want
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > to
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > get in for 8.0?
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> > Adrien
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org>

>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev-help@lucene.apache.org>

>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org>

>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev-help@lucene.apache.org>

>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> --
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> Lucene/Solr
Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> LinkedIn:
http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com <http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com/>

>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org> 
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> For additional commands,
e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev-help@lucene.apache.org> 
>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> > --
>> >>>>>>>>> > Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant,
Developer, Author, Speaker
>> >>>>>>>>> > LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
| Book: http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com <http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com/>

>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
<mailto:dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org> 
>> >>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
<mailto:dev-help@lucene.apache.org> 
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> --
>> >>>
>> >>> Nicholas Knize, Ph.D., GISP
>> >>> Geospatial Software Guy  |  Elasticsearch
>> >>> Apache Lucene Committer
>> >>> nknize@apache.org <mailto:nknize@apache.org> 
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
>> >> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
<http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com/> 
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org>

>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev-help@lucene.apache.org>

>>
>


-- 
Adrien

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org>

For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev-help@lucene.apache.org>


-- 

Lucene/Solr Search Committer (PMC), Developer, Author, Speaker

LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
<http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com/> 

-- 

Lucene/Solr Search Committer (PMC), Developer, Author, Speaker

LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
<http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com/> 

 


Mime
View raw message