lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Grant Ingersoll <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] merge lucene/solr development (take 3)
Date Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:21:57 GMT

On Mar 12, 2010, at 11:07 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:

> Here's what I didn't like. The vote was:
> * ambiguous
> * something that the Solr devs tried to push through and bullied folks on during discussion
(those who originally had questions were persuaded that it was the "right thing to do" by
those in the PMC leadership).

It was Mike's proposal to begin with and he isn't a Solr committer.  As I said in the email
the delta of Lucene committers who are not Solr committers are all either +1 or 0 and they
are the ones doing the work.  Go look at the votes.  As for persuasion, isn't that how discussions
work?  Both sides make there case and then people vote.

> * not healthy for the project

Clearly, you are in the minority on that view, especially given that the all of the most active
Lucene committers are for it.  There is still going to be Solr and still going to be Lucene.

> * subject to VETO since at the very least it proposes code modifications, but also because:

No, it doesn't.  No one has proposed any code mods.  There is still going to be Solr and still
going to be Lucene.   Separate JARs.  Separate WARs.  You will likely see some code moved
(analyzers to start), but you can veto those specific moves when the time comes if you don't
think it makes sense.

View raw message