Hi, Nutch is, just as Solr, highly customizable using all sorts of plugins. Forking it is not recommended. If you happen to come across behaviour in one of its tools that is not configurable, it can be made configurable.
Regards, Markus Op di 7 jan 2025 om 16:52 schreef David Smiley <dsmi...@apache.org>: > Forking anything is a burden on you to maintain your fork. You didn't say > *why* you want to fork something instead of simply use something. You > mentioned adding features but search engine platforms like Solr are > designed to be highly pluggable/extensible without forking. It's a > platform not a product. > > On Sun, Jan 5, 2025 at 6:36 PM anon <anonimoussech...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello people!! > > > > I was going to fork sourcegraph because I was looking for a search > > engine specific to code source such as github and gitlab with the > > possibility to index decompiled file offline. then I read this copyright > > > > > https://github.com/sourcegraph/sourcegraph-public-snapshot/blob/main/LICENSE.enterprise > > < > > > https://github.com/sourcegraph/sourcegraph-public-snapshot/blob/main/LICENSE.enterprise > > > > > > it seems to be *more than* proprietary. Then I just found opensearch. It > > seems modular. I might fork it to: > > 1- index only source code from github/gitlab and from local to my > instance > > 2- use regex and codeql queries in the search client. > > > > Opensearch seems good but not modular enough. > > > > > > I think, solr the best choice for me. I will complete with a fork on > nutch. > > > > I think a Nutch fork would absolutely complete what I am looking for: > > > > - it is free software > > > > - it is modular on many protocol (not git yet), and solr compatible > > > > I suggest that I fork nutch to add a plugin there > > https://github.com/apache/nutch/tree/master/src/plugin under a new > > folder protocol-file and why not let people fork it. > > > > Is it a good idea? > > > > Best regards. > > >
