I didn';t see a branch_10_5_1, so my backport was to branch_10_5

On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 7:39 AM Alan Woodward <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I have back-ported https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/16450 to the 10.5.1 
> branch.
>
> Thanks Ignacio!
>
> On 5 Aug 2026, at 12:23, Michael Sokolov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> OK, I just did that, thanks
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 7:12 AM Ignacio Vera <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Sure Michael,
>
> The fix looks well self-contained (and tiny), please feel free to backport it 
> to branch 10.5.
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 11:36 AM Michael Sokolov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> That bugfix  was in https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/16403/
> (commit: 2459ab7749c6062d0ee5a946430745c46cd9fda4)
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 6:33 AM Michael Sokolov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Is it possible to also include
>
> * GITHUB#16400: Restore HNSW graph reuse during merges under per-field
> vectors formats,
>  including the default codec. Since 10.4.0 the merger tested the
> per-field wrapper instead
>  of the unwrapped reader, so every merge rebuilt the graph from
> scratch. (Jeho Jeong)
>
> this was a pretty bad regression I think, although indexing
> performance only.  It is lacking a CHANGES entry on main, sorry
> (because the bug did not occur on main)!  I can address that
> separately
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 4:46 AM Ignacio Vera <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> +1
>
> I spoke with Alan offline and I will be the release manager. I am planning to 
> build the release candidate tomorrow if there are no concerns.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ignacio
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 9:31 AM Alan Woodward <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> We’ve identified a nasty bug in lucene 10.5.0, where boolean queries using 
> one of the doc-values based range queries as an exclusion clause can return 
> incorrect results (see https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/16450).  I think 
> this warrants a bugfix release, and I’m happy to act as release manager 
> (unless anybody else would like to volunteer :).
>
> We have a number of bug-fixes in the 10.6 changes section, but none of them 
> look to me as if they are major enough to need back porting.  There are a 
> couple of performance bugs which could go either way but I’d lean towards 
> keeping the release as small as possible to get this fix out quickly.
>
> - Alan
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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]
>
>

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

Reply via email to