Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
26 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Michael Busch
Hi all,

we were talking about releasing Lucene 2.3 already some weeks ago, but
it seems that the list with issues targeted for 2.3 doesn't get smaller.
Currently there are these 7 issues in the list:
- LUCENE-1061: Adding a factory to QueryParser to instantiate query
instances (Unassigned)
- LUCENE-1044: Behavior on hard power shutdown (Mike)
- LUCENE-1052: Add an "termInfosIndexDivisor" to IndexReader (Mike)
- LUCENE-1001: Add Payload retrieval to Spans (Grant)
- LUCENE-1045: SortField.AUTO doesn't work with long (Grant)
- LUCENE-1077: New Analysis Contributions (Grant)
- LUCENE-1079: DocValues cleanup: constructor & getInnerArray() (Doron)

I think we all voted earlier this year to have more frequent releases
instead of very big ones. But I believe that this release has already a
whole bunch of new features (e. g. DocumentsWriter, background merges,
IndexReader.reopen()), so I think we should stop adding more features to
the 2.3 list (except bug fixes of course) and plan a bit ahead how long
the above mentioned issues are going to take.

So everyone on the list above: Could you give an estimate on when the
patches will be ready to commit? And are there issues on list that
shouldn't block 2.3? I think 1061 shouldn't block the release, because
nobody is assigned.

Another question to everyone: Are there other issue that you really want
to get into 2.3 that are not on the list?

I'd like to get LUCENE-584 in, but I have to read through the recent
comments to figure out how much work is left. It should not block 2.3 if
all other issues are resolved.

I think a good target would be to complete all 2.3 issues by end of this
year. Then we can start a code freeze beginning of next year, so that
we'll have 2.3 out hopefully by mid/end of January '08. I would
volunteer to act as the release manager again.

Best,
-Michael


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Grant Ingersoll-2

On Dec 5, 2007, at 9:49 PM, Michael Busch wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> we were talking about releasing Lucene 2.3 already some weeks ago, but
> it seems that the list with issues targeted for 2.3 doesn't get  
> smaller.
> Currently there are these 7 issues in the list:
> - LUCENE-1061: Adding a factory to QueryParser to instantiate query
> instances (Unassigned)
> - LUCENE-1044: Behavior on hard power shutdown (Mike)
> - LUCENE-1052: Add an "termInfosIndexDivisor" to IndexReader (Mike)
> - LUCENE-1001: Add Payload retrieval to Spans (Grant)

Moved to later.

>
> - LUCENE-1045: SortField.AUTO doesn't work with long (Grant)

We need a decision here on how best to change this.  We have two  
viable patches, one that keeps the status quo, more or less and one  
that changes FieldCache to be a class instead of an Interface and also  
removes FieldCacheImpl.  It is NOT back-compat. but the feeling is  
(and I asked on user) that this change is acceptable.  It would,  
however, require a recompile, as Yonik points out.  Probably not a big  
deal either as long as we advertise this up front, but I don't feel  
comfortable making the decision (I am happy w/ either patch.)  The  
change to class, I think makes more sense in the long run.

I suppose the other alternative is to make the changes to the  
existing, as in the first patch, then deprecate ExtendedFieldCache and  
mark FieldCache such that it will be changed in 3.x to be a class,  
since that will require a recompile, presumably.

Either way, once the decision is made, it is pretty trivial to make  
the appropriate changes.

>
> - LUCENE-1077: New Analysis Contributions (Grant)

I will probably commit this in a day or two (I just uploaded a  
patch).  It is all new functionality to provide various SinkTokenizer  
implementations and a few convenience classes for working with  
Payloads.  Since these are additive, it shouldn't hold up the release.


>
> - LUCENE-1079: DocValues cleanup: constructor & getInnerArray()  
> (Doron)
>
> I think we all voted earlier this year to have more frequent releases
> instead of very big ones. But I believe that this release has  
> already a
> whole bunch of new features (e. g. DocumentsWriter, background merges,
> IndexReader.reopen()), so I think we should stop adding more  
> features to
> the 2.3 list (except bug fixes of course) and plan a bit ahead how  
> long
> the above mentioned issues are going to take.
>
> So everyone on the list above: Could you give an estimate on when the
> patches will be ready to commit? And are there issues on list that
> shouldn't block 2.3? I think 1061 shouldn't block the release, because
> nobody is assigned.
>
> Another question to everyone: Are there other issue that you really  
> want
> to get into 2.3 that are not on the list?
>
> I'd like to get LUCENE-584 in, but I have to read through the recent
> comments to figure out how much work is left. It should not block  
> 2.3 if
> all other issues are resolved.
>
> I think a good target would be to complete all 2.3 issues by end of  
> this
> year. Then we can start a code freeze beginning of next year, so that
> we'll have 2.3 out hopefully by mid/end of January '08. I would
> volunteer to act as the release manager again.
>
> Best,
> -Michael
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>

--------------------------
Grant Ingersoll
http://lucene.grantingersoll.com

Lucene Helpful Hints:
http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/BasicsOfPerformance
http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/LuceneFAQ




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Michael Busch
In reply to this post by Michael Busch
Michael Busch wrote:

> - LUCENE-1061: Adding a factory to QueryParser to instantiate query
> instances (Unassigned)

I moved this to 2.4.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Shai Erera
Hi

What about LUCENE-1068 (Invalid Behavior of StandardTokenizerImpl) - that is
a bug to which I've proposed a solution and provided a patch. For some
reason, the conversation around it died ...
LUCENE-1064 (Make TopDocs constructor public) - this is not a bug, but such
a minor issue I would have solved it myself if I had the permissions to
commit the code.

On Dec 6, 2007 6:10 AM, Michael Busch <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Michael Busch wrote:
>
> > - LUCENE-1061: Adding a factory to QueryParser to instantiate query
> > instances (Unassigned)
>
> I moved this to 2.4.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


--
Regards,

Shai Erera
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Doron Cohen
In reply to this post by Grant Ingersoll-2
I would like to also include:

- LUCENE-1019: CustomScoreQuery should support multiple
               ValueSourceQueries (ready, will commit soon)

- LUCENE 1081: Remove the "Experimental" warnings from
               search.function package.

- Doron

Grant Ingersoll <[hidden email]> wrote on 06/12/2007 05:59:39:

>
> On Dec 5, 2007, at 9:49 PM, Michael Busch wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > we were talking about releasing Lucene 2.3 already some weeks ago, but
> > it seems that the list with issues targeted for 2.3 doesn't get
> > smaller.
> > Currently there are these 7 issues in the list:
> > - LUCENE-1061: Adding a factory to QueryParser to instantiate query
> > instances (Unassigned)
> > - LUCENE-1044: Behavior on hard power shutdown (Mike)
> > - LUCENE-1052: Add an "termInfosIndexDivisor" to IndexReader (Mike)
> > - LUCENE-1001: Add Payload retrieval to Spans (Grant)
>
> Moved to later.
>
> >
> > - LUCENE-1045: SortField.AUTO doesn't work with long (Grant)
>
> We need a decision here on how best to change this.  We have two
> viable patches, one that keeps the status quo, more or less and one
> that changes FieldCache to be a class instead of an Interface and also
> removes FieldCacheImpl.  It is NOT back-compat. but the feeling is
> (and I asked on user) that this change is acceptable.  It would,
> however, require a recompile, as Yonik points out.  Probably not a big
> deal either as long as we advertise this up front, but I don't feel
> comfortable making the decision (I am happy w/ either patch.)  The
> change to class, I think makes more sense in the long run.
>
> I suppose the other alternative is to make the changes to the
> existing, as in the first patch, then deprecate ExtendedFieldCache and
> mark FieldCache such that it will be changed in 3.x to be a class,
> since that will require a recompile, presumably.
>
> Either way, once the decision is made, it is pretty trivial to make
> the appropriate changes.
>
> >
> > - LUCENE-1077: New Analysis Contributions (Grant)
>
> I will probably commit this in a day or two (I just uploaded a
> patch).  It is all new functionality to provide various SinkTokenizer
> implementations and a few convenience classes for working with
> Payloads.  Since these are additive, it shouldn't hold up the release.
>
>
> >
> > - LUCENE-1079: DocValues cleanup: constructor & getInnerArray()
> > (Doron)
> >
> > I think we all voted earlier this year to have more frequent releases
> > instead of very big ones. But I believe that this release has
> > already a
> > whole bunch of new features (e. g. DocumentsWriter, background merges,
> > IndexReader.reopen()), so I think we should stop adding more
> > features to
> > the 2.3 list (except bug fixes of course) and plan a bit ahead how
> > long
> > the above mentioned issues are going to take.
> >
> > So everyone on the list above: Could you give an estimate on when the
> > patches will be ready to commit? And are there issues on list that
> > shouldn't block 2.3? I think 1061 shouldn't block the release, because
> > nobody is assigned.
> >
> > Another question to everyone: Are there other issue that you really
> > want
> > to get into 2.3 that are not on the list?
> >
> > I'd like to get LUCENE-584 in, but I have to read through the recent
> > comments to figure out how much work is left. It should not block
> > 2.3 if
> > all other issues are resolved.
> >
> > I think a good target would be to complete all 2.3 issues by end of
> > this
> > year. Then we can start a code freeze beginning of next year, so that
> > we'll have 2.3 out hopefully by mid/end of January '08. I would
> > volunteer to act as the release manager again.
> >
> > Best,
> > -Michael
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
>
> --------------------------
> Grant Ingersoll
> http://lucene.grantingersoll.com
>
> Lucene Helpful Hints:
> http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/BasicsOfPerformance
> http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/LuceneFAQ
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Paul Elschot
In reply to this post by Michael Busch
On Thursday 06 December 2007 03:49:17 Michael Busch wrote:
> Hi all,
>
...
>
> I'd like to get LUCENE-584 in, but I have to read through the recent
> comments to figure out how much work is left. It should not block 2.3 if
> all other issues are resolved.

I'd prefer LUCENE-584 to be added to the trunk shortly after the next
release, so it gets enough exposure and time to find out a good way
to make Filter independent of BitSet. I tried various ways,
and with all of them I ran into unexpected problems, not really
big ones, but enough to convince me that more discussion will
be needed, whichever way is chosen.

Regards,
Paul Elschot

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Michael McCandless-2
In reply to this post by Michael Busch
"Michael Busch" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> - LUCENE-1044: Behavior on hard power shutdown (Mike)

I'm actively working on this one; it's somewhat tricky.  I hope to get
an initial patch attached soon, but it will be a rough first start.
But I think once we add review/iterations/holidays, it's likely this
one won't be committed until some time early next year.

> - LUCENE-1052: Add an "termInfosIndexDivisor" to IndexReader (Mike)

I think for 2.3 we should go with the solution as currently committed,
and take the ongoing debate about how to allow "algorithmic" decisions
on sub-sampling the TermInfos that are loaded into RAM, into 2.4?  I'll
update the issue.

Mike

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Michael McCandless-2
In reply to this post by Michael Busch

"Michael Busch" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> - LUCENE-1044: Behavior on hard power shutdown (Mike)

OK, on further thinking here... I think we should not hold up 2.3 for
this issue.

It's a fairly large change, so I'd prefer to commit it just after a
release so it has some time to live on the trunk first (ie the same
motivation as LUCENE-584).  And, this is a longstanding/pre-existing
issue.

Maybe we can target committing these few issues soon after 2.3 is
released and then do another release sooner rather than later, since
we are wanting to do more frequent releases?

I'll mark it as 2.4 target.

Mike

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Michael Busch
Michael McCandless wrote:
> It's a fairly large change, so I'd prefer to commit it just after a
> release so it has some time to live on the trunk first (ie the same
> motivation as LUCENE-584).  And, this is a longstanding/pre-existing
> issue.

I moved LUCENE-584 to 2.4 as well.

>
> Maybe we can target committing these few issues soon after 2.3 is
> released and then do another release sooner rather than later, since
> we are wanting to do more frequent releases?

+1

-Michael

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Karl Wettin
In reply to this post by Michael Busch

6 dec 2007 kl. 05.10 skrev Michael Busch:

> 2.4


What happened to this plan:

<http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--Migrate-Lucene-to-JDK-1.5-for-3.0-release-tf4154899.html#a11963574 
 >

?



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Karl Wettin
6 dec 2007 kl. 19.06 skrev Karl Wettin:
> 6 dec 2007 kl. 05.10 skrev Michael Busch:
>
>> 2.4
> What happened to this plan:

Actually, this link is better:
<http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A--VOTE--Migrate-Lucene-to-JDK-1.5-for-3.0-release-p11967391.html 
 >


--
karl

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Michael Busch
Karl Wettin wrote:

> 6 dec 2007 kl. 19.06 skrev Karl Wettin:
>> 6 dec 2007 kl. 05.10 skrev Michael Busch:
>>
>>> 2.4
>> What happened to this plan:
>
> Actually, this link is better:
> <http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A--VOTE--Migrate-Lucene-to-JDK-1.5-for-3.0-release-p11967391.html>
>
>
>

I think we want to stick to this plan, except that we want to squeeze in
a 2.4 release, with all the features on this list that are currently
unresolved:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&mode=hide&sorter/order=DESC&sorter/field=priority&resolution=-1&pid=12310110&fixfor=12312681

We should try to keep this list small as well, so that we can release
2.4 very early next year (maybe 1-2 months after 2.3??) and then move to
2.9 (no new features, just deprecations) and then finally 3.0 with JDK 1.5.

Sounds like a plan? :-)

-Michael

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Michael Busch
In reply to this post by Michael Busch
Michael Busch wrote:
>
> I think a good target would be to complete all 2.3 issues by end of this
> year. Then we can start a code freeze beginning of next year, so that
> we'll have 2.3 out hopefully by mid/end of January '08. I would
> volunteer to act as the release manager again.
>

There are 4 issues left on the 2.3 list:

LUCENE-1086: Incorrect behavior in TrecDocMaker (Doron)
LUCENE-1079: DocValues cleanup: constructor & getInnerArray() (Doron)
LUCENE-1019: CustomScoreQuery should support multiple ValueSourceQueries
(Doron)
LUCENE-1045: SortField.AUTO doesn't work with long (Grant)

I was thinking about the following schedule for the 2.3 release:
- Create 2.3 branch on January 7th
- Feature freeze for 10 days on the branch; time for testing and
documentation improvements
- Call release vote on January 18th
- Release aprox. on the 21th

Any objections regarding these dates?
Grant & Doron: do you think you can commit the 4 issue by January 7th?

-Michael

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Doron Cohen
> Michael Busch wrote:
> >
> > I think a good target would be to complete all 2.3 issues by
> end of this
> > year. Then we can start a code freeze beginning of next year, so that
> > we'll have 2.3 out hopefully by mid/end of January '08. I would
> > volunteer to act as the release manager again.
> >
>
> There are 4 issues left on the 2.3 list:
>
> LUCENE-1086: Incorrect behavior in TrecDocMaker (Doron)
> LUCENE-1079: DocValues cleanup: constructor & getInnerArray() (Doron)
> LUCENE-1019: CustomScoreQuery should support multiple ValueSourceQueries
> (Doron)
> LUCENE-1045: SortField.AUTO doesn't work with long (Grant)
>
> I was thinking about the following schedule for the 2.3 release:
> - Create 2.3 branch on January 7th
> - Feature freeze for 10 days on the branch; time for testing and
> documentation improvements
> - Call release vote on January 18th
> - Release aprox. on the 21th
>
> Any objections regarding these dates?
> Grant & Doron: do you think you can commit the 4 issue by January 7th?

I'll copmlete mine this week.

>
> -Michael


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Shai Erera
Issue 1068 - Incorrect behavior of StandardTokenizerImpl (
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1068) was also marked for
2.3(before). the patch is ready. Do you think it can be included as
well?

On Dec 12, 2007 11:43 AM, Doron Cohen <[hidden email]> wrote:

> > Michael Busch wrote:
> > >
> > > I think a good target would be to complete all 2.3 issues by
> > end of this
> > > year. Then we can start a code freeze beginning of next year, so that
> > > we'll have 2.3 out hopefully by mid/end of January '08. I would
> > > volunteer to act as the release manager again.
> > >
> >
> > There are 4 issues left on the 2.3 list:
> >
> > LUCENE-1086: Incorrect behavior in TrecDocMaker (Doron)
> > LUCENE-1079: DocValues cleanup: constructor & getInnerArray() (Doron)
> > LUCENE-1019: CustomScoreQuery should support multiple ValueSourceQueries
> > (Doron)
> > LUCENE-1045: SortField.AUTO doesn't work with long (Grant)
> >
> > I was thinking about the following schedule for the 2.3 release:
> > - Create 2.3 branch on January 7th
> > - Feature freeze for 10 days on the branch; time for testing and
> > documentation improvements
> > - Call release vote on January 18th
> > - Release aprox. on the 21th
> >
> > Any objections regarding these dates?
> > Grant & Doron: do you think you can commit the 4 issue by January 7th?
>
> I'll copmlete mine this week.
>
> >
> > -Michael
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


--
Regards,

Shai Erera
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Grant Ingersoll-2
In reply to this post by Michael Busch

On Dec 12, 2007, at 4:16 AM, Michael Busch wrote:
> Any objections regarding these dates?
> Grant & Doron: do you think you can commit the 4 issue by January 7th?
>

I'll do it next week.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Grant Ingersoll-2
In reply to this post by Shai Erera
Yes.  I will do this next week as well.

On Dec 12, 2007, at 5:55 AM, Shai Erera wrote:

> Issue 1068 - Incorrect behavior of StandardTokenizerImpl (
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1068) was also marked for
> 2.3(before). the patch is ready. Do you think it can be included as
> well?
>
> On Dec 12, 2007 11:43 AM, Doron Cohen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>>> Michael Busch wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think a good target would be to complete all 2.3 issues by
>>> end of this
>>>> year. Then we can start a code freeze beginning of next year, so  
>>>> that
>>>> we'll have 2.3 out hopefully by mid/end of January '08. I would
>>>> volunteer to act as the release manager again.
>>>>
>>>
>>> There are 4 issues left on the 2.3 list:
>>>
>>> LUCENE-1086: Incorrect behavior in TrecDocMaker (Doron)
>>> LUCENE-1079: DocValues cleanup: constructor & getInnerArray()  
>>> (Doron)
>>> LUCENE-1019: CustomScoreQuery should support multiple  
>>> ValueSourceQueries
>>> (Doron)
>>> LUCENE-1045: SortField.AUTO doesn't work with long (Grant)
>>>
>>> I was thinking about the following schedule for the 2.3 release:
>>> - Create 2.3 branch on January 7th
>>> - Feature freeze for 10 days on the branch; time for testing and
>>> documentation improvements
>>> - Call release vote on January 18th
>>> - Release aprox. on the 21th
>>>
>>> Any objections regarding these dates?
>>> Grant & Doron: do you think you can commit the 4 issue by January  
>>> 7th?
>>
>> I'll copmlete mine this week.
>>
>>>
>>> -Michael
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Shai Erera


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Michael Busch
In reply to this post by Michael Busch
Michael Busch wrote:
>
> I think a good target would be to complete all 2.3 issues by end of this
> year. Then we can start a code freeze beginning of next year, so that
> we'll have 2.3 out hopefully by mid/end of January '08. I would
> volunteer to act as the release manager again.
>

Hi Team,

perfect timing! As of today all 2.3 issues are committed (thanks
everyone!). If nobody objects I will create a 2.3 branch on Thursday,
Jan 3rd, and we will have a code freeze on the branch for aprox. 10
days. In this time period only critical/blocking issues and
documentation patches can be committed to the branch.

-Michael

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Doron Cohen-2
Hi Michael,

Lucene-1095 is ready to commit though not marked as 2.3.
I think it is okay both ways - wait for 2.4 or commit now .

Preferences?

On Dec 30, 2007 1:29 PM, Michael Busch <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Michael Busch wrote:
> >
> > I think a good target would be to complete all 2.3 issues by end of this
> > year. Then we can start a code freeze beginning of next year, so that
> > we'll have 2.3 out hopefully by mid/end of January '08. I would
> > volunteer to act as the release manager again.
> >
>
> Hi Team,
>
> perfect timing! As of today all 2.3 issues are committed (thanks
> everyone!). If nobody objects I will create a 2.3 branch on Thursday,
> Jan 3rd, and we will have a code freeze on the branch for aprox. 10
> days. In this time period only critical/blocking issues and
> documentation patches can be committed to the branch.
>
> -Michael
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Let's release Lucene 2.3 soon?

Grant Ingersoll-2
In reply to this post by Michael Busch

On Dec 30, 2007, at 6:29 AM, Michael Busch wrote:

>  In this time period only critical/blocking issues and
> documentation patches can be committed to the branch.
>

I'd add that we should make some effort to clean up old JIRA issues...

-Grant

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

12