On Fri, 1 Jul 2011, Bill Janssen wrote:
Andi Vajda wrote:
That being said, if you send in javadoc patches, I agree, the results
should be published like they are on the lucene/java site (under
resources) and I can take care of that.
Here's a patch (against the JCC branch_3x):
Thank you,
On Fri, 1 Jul 2011, Bill Janssen wrote:
Andi Vajda wrote:
By the way, you might want to add a paragraph in that section about
adding the ["-framework", "Python"] flags for building JCC on OS X. I
tripped over that again.
If you send a paragraph to this effect, I'll integrate it into the d
On Jul 2, 2011, at 15:20, Darren Govoni wrote:
> Without the third 0, how will you version critical patch releases should they
> be necessary?
If the patch comes from Lucene, then I'd use their new version number, as
usual. If it's a PyLucene fix, its version would go from 3.3-1 to 3.3-2.
An
Without the third 0, how will you version critical patch releases should
they be necessary?
On 07/02/2011 09:13 AM, Andi Vajda wrote:
On Jul 2, 2011, at 13:58, Christian Heimes wrote:
Am 01.07.2011 14:24, schrieb Andi Vajda:
The PyLucene 3.3.0-1 release closely tracking the recent release o
On Jul 2, 2011, at 13:58, Christian Heimes wrote:
> Am 01.07.2011 14:24, schrieb Andi Vajda:
>>
>> The PyLucene 3.3.0-1 release closely tracking the recent release of Lucene
>> Java 3.3 is ready.
>>
>> A release candidate is available from:
>> http://people.apache.org/~vajda/staging_area/
>>
Am 01.07.2011 14:24, schrieb Andi Vajda:
>
> The PyLucene 3.3.0-1 release closely tracking the recent release of Lucene
> Java 3.3 is ready.
>
> A release candidate is available from:
> http://people.apache.org/~vajda/staging_area/
>
> A list of changes in this release can be seen at:
> http://s
