Mailing List Archive: Lucene CHANGES.txt 8.8 adjustment proposals

Lucene CHANGES.txt 8.8 adjustment proposals

Jan 14, 2021, 8:43 AM

Post #1 of 3 (230 views)

I'm reviewing the 8.8 section of CHANGES.txt to see what's coming.
Perhaps my proposals might come off as nit-picking; if you don't care then
you don't have to say so :-). I care about CHANGES.txt being well organized
because it helps us all understand the changes better, especially for our
users.

Should "New Features" include new options/toggles on existing features,
leaving such for "Improvements"? It could helps delineate larger release
highlights from incremental improvement features but I really have no
strong opinion. It'd be nice to have some consistency on the matter;
otherwise the distinct sections here become arbitrary. For 8.8, it appears
all are on New Features; the two Improvements we have actually strike me as
Optimizations...

This Improvement issues sounds like Optimization issues:
* LUCENE-9455: ExitableTermsEnum should sample timeout and interruption
check before calling next(). (Zach Chen via Bruno Roustant)
* LUCENE-9023: GlobalOrdinalsWithScore should not compute occurrences when
the
provided min is 1. (Jim Ferenczi)

Mike Drob, why did you add this Solr item to Lucene under Other?:
* SOLR-14995: Update Jetty to 9.4.34 (Mike Drob)

~ David Smiley
Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley

Re: Lucene CHANGES.txt 8.8 adjustment proposals [ In reply to ]

mdrob at apache

Jan 14, 2021, 9:11 AM

Post #2 of 3 (230 views)

Permalink

Lucene had Jetty versions listed under its own dependencies, I didn't
investigate further on how it's used. I suspect it is for lucene
replication, but I didn't look further.

That actually reminds me that I think I never finished the backport to 8.8;
I think this change is currently only on master. Let me double check.

On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:43 AM David Smiley <dsmiley@apache.org> wrote:

> I'm reviewing the 8.8 section of CHANGES.txt to see what's coming.
> Perhaps my proposals might come off as nit-picking; if you don't care then
> you don't have to say so :-). I care about CHANGES.txt being well organized
> because it helps us all understand the changes better, especially for our
> users.
>
> Should "New Features" include new options/toggles on existing features,
> leaving such for "Improvements"? It could helps delineate larger release
> highlights from incremental improvement features but I really have no
> strong opinion. It'd be nice to have some consistency on the matter;
> otherwise the distinct sections here become arbitrary. For 8.8, it appears
> all are on New Features; the two Improvements we have actually strike me as
> Optimizations...
>
> This Improvement issues sounds like Optimization issues:
> * LUCENE-9455: ExitableTermsEnum should sample timeout and interruption
> check before calling next(). (Zach Chen via Bruno Roustant)
> * LUCENE-9023: GlobalOrdinalsWithScore should not compute occurrences when
> the
> provided min is 1. (Jim Ferenczi)
>
> Mike Drob, why did you add this Solr item to Lucene under Other?:
> * SOLR-14995: Update Jetty to 9.4.34 (Mike Drob)
>
> ~ David Smiley
> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>

Re: Lucene CHANGES.txt 8.8 adjustment proposals [ In reply to ]

mdrob at apache

Jan 14, 2021, 2:59 PM

Post #3 of 3 (230 views)

Permalink

Never mind, that was correctly backported to branch_8x, not sure why I
thought that it wasn't. Apologies for the confusion.

If you feel that it needs to be under a different section, I have no
objections to it. Alternatively, we can move that SOLR issue to LUCENE jira
and edit the entry if that's what you have concerns about.

On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 11:11 AM Mike Drob <mdrob@apache.org> wrote:

> Lucene had Jetty versions listed under its own dependencies, I didn't
> investigate further on how it's used. I suspect it is for lucene
> replication, but I didn't look further.
>
> That actually reminds me that I think I never finished the backport to
> 8.8; I think this change is currently only on master. Let me double check.
>
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:43 AM David Smiley <dsmiley@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I'm reviewing the 8.8 section of CHANGES.txt to see what's coming.
>> Perhaps my proposals might come off as nit-picking; if you don't care
>> then you don't have to say so :-). I care about CHANGES.txt being well
>> organized because it helps us all understand the changes better, especially
>> for our users.
>>
>> Should "New Features" include new options/toggles on existing features,
>> leaving such for "Improvements"? It could helps delineate larger release
>> highlights from incremental improvement features but I really have no
>> strong opinion. It'd be nice to have some consistency on the matter;
>> otherwise the distinct sections here become arbitrary. For 8.8, it appears
>> all are on New Features; the two Improvements we have actually strike me as
>> Optimizations...
>>
>> This Improvement issues sounds like Optimization issues:
>> * LUCENE-9455: ExitableTermsEnum should sample timeout and interruption
>> check before calling next(). (Zach Chen via Bruno Roustant)
>> * LUCENE-9023: GlobalOrdinalsWithScore should not compute occurrences
>> when the
>> provided min is 1. (Jim Ferenczi)
>>
>> Mike Drob, why did you add this Solr item to Lucene under Other?:
>> * SOLR-14995: Update Jetty to 9.4.34 (Mike Drob)
>>
>> ~ David Smiley
>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>
>