On Sep 21, 2012, at 4:51 PM, Robert Muir wrote: > On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 4:20 PM, [email protected] > <[email protected]> wrote: >> compatibility concern to changes until v4 is actually released. In >> your opinion, is it too late to do class renames in this area? -- >> LUCENE-4374 is about renaming TwoDoublesStrategy to >> PointVectorStrategy (much better name; the old name is crap and that's >> my fault). > > I can't really answer this question: as I hinted at monday, I'm not > going to try to police issues. > Honestly the codebase is too large for one person to "police" what > issues go in and out of a release. > If its something I feel i know pretty well, I'll give my opinion, but > in general this stuff needs to be decided by the people that know it > (e.g. you, Chris, Ryan).
Ok good -- makes sense. In this case I know Chris is a definite fan, and I've given up on trying to contact Ryan these days (never ending vacation?). > I will only say (not knowing about the classes in question) that there > is always the conservative option to mark things experimental and > change them in 4.1. > Its conservative in the sense that various examples/docs and such wont break. All Lucene spatial classes have the @lucene.experimental marking already. I need to add these to the Solr ones too. I don't want that label to be there always but this technology is moving a bit too fast now. ~ David --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
