Yes, I added that wiki piece for Lucene.Net. Please refine it as
desired.
I'm not clear on your timeline below... when you re-released 1.3-rc3,
that was with Pasha's codebase, right? And what about 1.4-alpha -
was any of that code from Pasha, or was it a from-scratch creation by
you?
Erik
On Apr 16, 2006, at 10:25 PM, George Aroush wrote:
Hi Noel,
I see that Lucene.Net has already been updated
(http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/April2006) possibly done by Erik.
In regards to the history of Lucene.Net/DotLucene, here is how it
went:
May 2003: 1.3-rc1 was released by Pasha Bizhan
Dec 2003: 1.3-rc2 was released by Pasha Bizhan
Sep 2004: 1.3-rc3 was released by Pasha Bizhan
Sep 2004: 1.3-rc3 went close source and all earlier releases were
removed
from SourceForge.net
Sep 2004: A new project called DotLucene was created on
SourceForge.net
Sep 2004: I re-released Lucene.Net 1.3-rc3 under the project name
DotLucene
on SourceForge.net
Oct 2004: 1.4-alpha of Lucene.Net was released by me
Nov 2004: 1.4-rc1 was released by me
Dec 2004: 1.4.3-beta was released by me
Jan 2005: 1.4.3-rc1 was released by me
Feb 2005: 1.4.3-final was released by me
May 2005: 1.9-beta was released by me
Feb 2006: 1.9-rc1 was released by me
As for Dan's documentation, I agree with you -- his terms are not
in ASF
terms so I will say "no" to him.
Regards,
-- George
-----Original Message-----
From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 11:31 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Lucene.Net
George,
Yes, a report needs to come from each project. You can see
examples in the
e-mail archives, or recent ones linked from
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/FrontPage.
If you wouldn't mind, I'd like to hear a bit of the history of
Lucene.Net.
It seems that there was Lucene.Net, then it forked with one version
becoming
DotLucene and another becoming closed source. The former is what
came to
here, according to the status file, but you seem to indicate that
not all of
the participants have come?
I assume that when you refer to "a promotional website for
DotLucene set up
by it's owner, Dan Letecky" you mean that Dan Letecky owns the
site. :-)
And I wouldn't be keen to accept his documentation under his terms.
--- Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: George Aroush [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 10:07
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: Adding Jeff Roderburg to Lucene.Net as a committer
Hi Nole,
Is the report for inclusion in this month something you need from
me? If
so, can you point me to what I need to report on, i.e.: any forms
that I
have to fill.
The IP is cleaned up some time ago (as far as I know if not please
advice.)
At SourceForge.net Lucene.Net (which is known as DotLucene) will no
longer
be supported. Do I need to do anything at SourceForge.net beside the
announcement that DotLucene has moved to ASF?
http://www.dotlucene.net/ is just a promotional website for
DotLucene set up
by it's owner, Dan Letecky. I sent an email to Dan asking if he
wants to
contribute his documentation of Lucene.Net to ASF (which is found
here:
http://www.dotlucene.net/documentation/) His response was:
"I'm willing to contribute my documentation as long as there is a
link back
to http://www.dotlucene.net on each contributed page. E.g.
<p>Contributed by
<a href="http://www.dotlucene.net";>dotlucene.net</a>."
I believe giving credit where it's due, but this maybe too much to
ask for.
In any case, I don't know ASF policy on this regards and if this is
acceptable. Please let me know, otherwise I will create and
maintain the
documentations myself.
As for the earlier project going closed-source, that was the case
with 1.2.
However, since I have taken over stating with 1.3 and now that
Lucene.Net is
on ASF, I don't see it gong back to closed-source any more.
Regards,
-- George
-----Original Message-----
From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 9:14 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: Adding Jeff Roderburg to Lucene.Net as a committer
Erik,
I'll add a +1. And please be sure to submit the report for
inclusion this
month.
For my information, I notice that the STATUS file says that this is
from the
DotLucene project on SourceForge. How are things going with IP
clearance?
And will this web site: http://www.dotlucene.net/ be coming over as
the
project's web site soon?
I see that an earlier Lucence.Net project went closed-source
(http://searchblackbox.com/lucene/index.html?ldn2). The only issue
I have
with them at the moment is their implication that they are THE
Lucene for
.net, rather than just A compatible implementation.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
