[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8566?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16693019#comment-16693019
 ] 

Tomoko Uchida commented on LUCENE-8566:
---------------------------------------

Thank you for your feedback. 

I understand that I dug up the old discussion, and it clearly seems that an 
umbrella issue is needed to cope with the situation.

Now I am not certain about whether we should carry on or not.
Is there practical value in continuing and taking our (of course I mean 
contributors' and reviewers') time for it, or should we simply close this issue 
as Won't Fix and work for more important things/issues?


> Deprecate methods in CustomAnalyzer.Builder which take factory classes
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-8566
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8566
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: modules/analysis
>            Reporter: Tomoko Uchida
>            Assignee: Uwe Schindler
>            Priority: Minor
>
> CustomAnalyzer.Builder has methods which take implementation classes as 
> follows.
>  - withTokenizer(Class<? extends TokenizerFactory> factory, String... params)
>  - withTokenizer(Class<? extends TokenizerFactory> factory, 
> Map<String,String> params)
>  - addTokenFilter(Class<? extends TokenFilterFactory> factory, String... 
> params)
>  - addTokenFilter(Class<? extends TokenFilterFactory> factory, 
> Map<String,String> params)
>  - addCharFilter(Class<? extends CharFilterFactory> factory, String... params)
>  - addCharFilter(Class<? extends CharFilterFactory> factory, 
> Map<String,String> params)
> Since the builder also has methods which take service names, it seems like 
> that above methods are unnecessary and a little bit misleading. Giving 
> symbolic names is preferable to implementation factory classes, but for now, 
> users can write code depending on implementation classes.
> What do you think about deprecating those methods (adding {{@Deprecated}} 
> annotations) and deleting them in the future releases? Those are called by 
> only test cases so deleting them should have no impact on current lucene/solr 
> codebase.
> If this proposal gains your consent, I will create a patch. (Let me know if I 
> missed some point. I'll close it.)



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

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

Reply via email to