Is the branch already cut for 8.0? which is it? On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 4:03 AM David Smiley <[email protected]> wrote: > > I finally have a patch up for > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12768 (already marked as 8.0 > blocker) that I feel pretty good about. This provides a key part of the > nested document support. > I will work on some documentation for it this week -- SOLR-13129 > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 3:07 PM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I don't think it is critical for this to be a blocker for 8.0. If it gets >> fixed in 8.0.1 that's ok too, given this is an ooold bug. >> I think we should simply remove the buffering feature in the UI and replace >> it with an error message popup or something. >> I'll try to take a look next week. >> >> -- >> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect >> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com >> >> 25. jan. 2019 kl. 20:39 skrev Tomás Fernández Löbbe <[email protected]>: >> >> I think the UI is an important Solr feature. As long as there is a >> reasonable time horizon for the issue being resolved I'm +1 on making it a >> blocker. I'm not familiar enough with the UI code to help either >> unfortunately. >> >> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 11:24 AM Gus Heck <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> It looks like someone tried to make it a blocker once before... And it's >>> actually a duplicate of an earlier issue >>> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9818). I guess its a question >>> of whether or not overall quality has a bearing on the decision to release. >>> As it turns out the screen shot I posted to the issue is less than half of >>> the shards that eventually got created since there was an outstanding queue >>> of requests still processing at the time. I'm now having to delete 50 or so >>> cores, which luckily are small 100 Mb initial testing cores, not the 20GB >>> cores we'll be testing on in the near future. It more or less makes it >>> impossible to recommend the use of the admin UI for anything other than >>> read only observation of the cluster. Now imagine someone leaves a browser >>> window open and forgets about it rather than browsing away or closing the >>> window, not knowing that it's silently pumping out requests after showing >>> an error... would completely hose a node, and until they tracked down the >>> source of the requests, (hope he didn't go home) it would be impossible to >>> resolve... >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 1:25 PM Adrien Grand <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Releasing a new major is very challenging on its own, I'd rather not >>>> call it a blocker and delay the release for it since this isn't a new >>>> regression in 8.0: it looks like a problem that has affected Solr >>>> since at least 6.3? I'm not familiar with the UI code at all, but >>>> maybe this is something that could get fixed before we build a RC? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 6:06 PM Gus Heck <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > I'd like to suggest that >>>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10211 be promoted to block >>>> > 8.0. I just got burned by it a second time. >>>> > >>>> > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 1:05 PM Uwe Schindler <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> Cool, >>>> >> >>>> >> I am working on giving my best release time guess as possible on the >>>> >> FOSDEM conference! >>>> >> >>>> >> Uwe >>>> >> >>>> >> ----- >>>> >> Uwe Schindler >>>> >> Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen >>>> >> http://www.thetaphi.de >>>> >> eMail: [email protected] >>>> >> >>>> >> > -----Original Message----- >>>> >> > From: Adrien Grand <[email protected]> >>>> >> > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2019 5:33 PM >>>> >> > To: Lucene Dev <[email protected]> >>>> >> > Subject: Re: Lucene/Solr 8.0 >>>> >> > >>>> >> > +1 to release 7.7 and 8.0 in a row starting on the week of February >>>> >> > 4th. >>>> >> > >>>> >> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 4:23 PM jim ferenczi <[email protected]> >>>> >> > wrote: >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > Hi, >>>> >> > > As we agreed some time ago I'd like to start on releasing 8.0. The >>>> >> > > branch is >>>> >> > already created so we can start the process anytime now. Unless there >>>> >> > are >>>> >> > objections I'd like to start the feature freeze next week in order to >>>> >> > build the >>>> >> > first candidate the week after. >>>> >> > > We'll also need a 7.7 release but I think we can handle both with >>>> >> > > Alan so >>>> >> > the question now is whether we are ok to start the release process or >>>> >> > if there >>>> >> > are any blockers left ;). >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > > Le mar. 15 janv. 2019 à 11:35, Alan Woodward <[email protected]> >>>> >> > a écrit : >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> I’ve started to work through the various deprecations on the new >>>> >> > >> master >>>> >> > branch. There are a lot of them, and I’m going to need some >>>> >> > assistance for >>>> >> > several of them, as it’s not entirely clear what to do. >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> I’ll open two overarching issues in JIRA, one for lucene and one >>>> >> > >> for Solr, >>>> >> > with lists of the deprecations that need to be removed in each one. >>>> >> > I’ll create >>>> >> > a shared branch on gitbox to work against, and push the changes I’ve >>>> >> > already >>>> >> > done there. We can then create individual JIRA issues for any >>>> >> > changes that >>>> >> > are more involved than just deleting code. >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> All assistance gratefully received, particularly for the Solr >>>> >> > >> deprecations >>>> >> > where there’s a lot of code I’m unfamiliar with. >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> On 8 Jan 2019, at 09:21, Alan Woodward <[email protected]> >>>> >> > wrote: >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> I think the current plan is to do a 7.7 release at the same time >>>> >> > >> as 8.0, to >>>> >> > handle any last-minute deprecations etc. So let’s keep those jobs >>>> >> > enabled >>>> >> > for now. >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> On 8 Jan 2019, at 09:10, Uwe Schindler <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> 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 >>>> >> > >> eMail: [email protected] >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> From: Alan Woodward <[email protected]> >>>> >> > >> Sent: Monday, January 7, 2019 11:30 AM >>>> >> > >> To: [email protected] >>>> >> > >> 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 <[email protected]> >>>> >> > wrote: >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> January. >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 2:04 AM S G <[email protected]> >>>> >> > 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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%20LU >>>> >> > CENE)%20AND%20priority%20%3D%20Blocker%20and%20status%20%3D%2 >>>> >> > 0open%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 <[email protected]> >>>> >> > wrote: >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> +1 >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 10:38 AM Alan Woodward >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > >> > <[email protected]> >>>> >> > 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > >> >> <[email protected]> >>>> >> > 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> a écrit : >>>> >> > >> >> >> >>>> >> > >> >> >> +1 to a 7.6 —lots of stuff in there >>>> >> > >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 4:47 PM Nicholas Knize >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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%3DBlocke >>>> >> > r%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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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%3DBlocke >>>> >> > r%20and%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20 >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>> Le lun. 3 sept. 2018 à 10:36, jim ferenczi >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >> > <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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- >>>> >> > [email protected] >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev- >>>> >> > [email protected] >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> > >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >> > ---------- >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev- >>>> >> > [email protected] >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev- >>>> >> > [email protected] >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> -- >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, >>>> >> > Developer, Author, Speaker >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> LinkedIn: >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley >>>> >> > | Book: http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >> > - >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev- >>>> >> > [email protected] >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev- >>>> >> > [email protected] >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > -- >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, >>>> >> > Author, Speaker >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> > Book: >>>> >> > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev- >>>> >> > [email protected] >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev- >>>> >> > [email protected] >>>> >> > >> >> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >> > >> >> >>> -- >>>> >> > >> >> >>> >>>> >> > >> >> >>> Nicholas Knize, Ph.D., GISP >>>> >> > >> >> >>> Geospatial Software Guy | Elasticsearch >>>> >> > >> >> >>> Apache Lucene Committer >>>> >> > >> >> >>> [email protected] >>>> >> > >> >> >> >>>> >> > >> >> >> -- >>>> >> > >> >> >> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, >>>> >> > Speaker >>>> >> > >> >> >> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: >>>> >> > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com >>>> >> > >> >> >>>> >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >> > >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >> > >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >> > >> >> >>>> >> > >> > >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> -- >>>> >> > >> Adrien >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> -- >>>> >> > >> Lucene/Solr Search Committer (PMC), Developer, Author, Speaker >>>> >> > >> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: >>>> >> > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> -- >>>> >> > >> Lucene/Solr Search Committer (PMC), Developer, Author, Speaker >>>> >> > >> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: >>>> >> > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >> >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > -- >>>> >> > Adrien >>>> >> > >>>> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > http://www.the111shift.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Adrien >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> http://www.the111shift.com >> >> > -- > Lucene/Solr Search Committer (PMC), Developer, Author, Speaker > LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
-- ----------------------------------------------------- Noble Paul --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
