Thank you Tomoko.
This vote has failed. I started a new vote for a RC2 that includes the
fix for the Luke launch script.
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 2:11 PM Tomoko Uchida
<tomoko.uchida.1111@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Ok, thank you. I backported it to branch_9_0.
>
> Tomoko
>
> 2021?11?22?(?) 21:29 Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com>:
> >
> > Agreed, I'll respin.
> > Tomoko, can you backport your fix to branch_9_0?
> >
> > Le lun. 22 nov. 2021 à 12:42, Dawid Weiss <dawid.weiss@gmail.com> a écrit :
> >>
> >> This is my copy/paste mistake - I work with Unixish shells all the
> >> time but rarely with a user interface and didn't have a chance to
> >> check. Let's see if anything else pops up but this is definitely worth
> >> a respin in my opinion as it's one of the fundamental reasons for the
> >> binary release to exist...
> >>
> >> Dawid
> >>
> >> On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 12:05 PM Tomoko Uchida
> >> <tomoko.uchida.1111@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > SUCCESS! [0:25:27.340580]
> >> >
> >> > I noticed the Luke start script for *nix does not work and pushed a
> >> > fix [1] on main and branch_9x. The launch script for Windows works
> >> > well.
> >> > I am fine with the release candidate - it is a minor shell script bug
> >> > and I think users can easily make a patch - but wanted to give notice
> >> > of that, just in case.
> >> >
> >> > [1] https://github.com/apache/lucene/commit/4193bcbc02313c82afcf8cf9e2d14e47466cb1c3
> >> >
> >> > Tomoko
> >> >
> >> > 2021?11?22?(?) 6:18 Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com>:
> >> > >
> >> > > Fair enough. I don't think this requires respinning so what I'll do is that I'll keep the vote thread open until we have a resolution on the issue.
> >> > >
> >> > > On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 1:29 PM Robert Muir <rcmuir@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> and yes, I think it is reasonable to be a blocker. If we release 9.0,
> >> > >> promising 2 major versions of back compat, some of these options get
> >> > >> removed from the table.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 7:23 AM Robert Muir <rcmuir@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Thanks Ignacio,
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > I see several choices, but the status quo of the testing is the problem.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > One choice is to not make any technical changes, but do something to
> >> > >> > prevent lucene from having to be compatible with 20 different versions
> >> > >> > :) For example, not supporting 2 major versions back would cut it in
> >> > >> > half. Another solution would be to release major versions faster so
> >> > >> > that we churn thru the versions at a more sustainable rate rather than
> >> > >> > having them pile up.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Another option is to technically alter how the testing is done (as
> >> > >> > suggested on the issue). It could mean that some of them only run
> >> > >> > nightly or otherwise in jenkins. Which exact tests? I'm not sure, just
> >> > >> > as long as it becomes reasonable.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 7:18 AM Ignacio Vera <iverase@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > > Your issue has not been ignored but the problem is that the version of the blocker has not been added so it doesn't appear in a search for blockers in Lucene 9 :(
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > > Do we need to discuss this again? I thought we discussed and agreed on increasing our backwards compatibility. My personal opinion is that it is a natural step for mature software that it is increasingly used in production environments.
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > > Regarding your concerns in the subject, there is a healthy discussion in the issue and there are sound proposals to ease the pain and they can be implemented any time, do you think it is still a blocker?
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > > On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 12:59 PM Robert Muir <rcmuir@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> Along the same lines of back compat woes, I'd like to see my blocker
> >> > >> > >> issue about back compat testing addressed in the release candidate,
> >> > >> > >> rather than simply ignored.
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10168
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> With the 9.0 release, we are attempting to *double* our backwards
> >> > >> > >> compatibility guarantees (2 major versions), yet here we are
> >> > >> > >> discussing insane release strategies that can't be guaranteed/tested
> >> > >> > >> to work (8.12-after-9.0-etc), here we are with back compat tests
> >> > >> > >> taking a minute and half on branch_9_0! Imagine how long they will
> >> > >> > >> take for branch_9_9!
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> When it comes to more back compat, people are quick to demand more of
> >> > >> > >> it every time. But when it comes to addressing the necessary issues to
> >> > >> > >> make it work...crickets.
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 5:11 AM Robert Muir <rcmuir@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> > >> >
> >> > >> > >> > -1 to release lucene 9.0, as long as branch_8x remains.
> >> > >> > >> >
> >> > >> > >> > I know you made a separate thread for this, but it is a real problem.
> >> > >> > >> >
> >> > >> > >> > The problem is that we can't support backwards compatibility like
> >> > >> > >> > this: releasing 9.0 then 8.12's and stuff. It isn't how the back
> >> > >> > >> > compat testing works, it is completely cowboy and unsupported.
> >> > >> > >> >
> >> > >> > >> > On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 9:19 AM Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > >> > > I think we should remove it but I remember it was controversial in the past. I'll start a separate thread.
> >> > >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > >> > > Le sam. 20 nov. 2021 à 14:38, Uwe Schindler <uwe@thetaphi.de> a écrit :
> >> > >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> > >> Yes. But we won't have a 8.12 release so I assume the branch_8x is dead. Maybe we should dass a note to it's readme or delete it?
> >> > >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> > >> Uwe
> >> > >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> > >> Am 20. November 2021 13:15:23 UTC schrieb Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com>:
> >> > >> > >> > >>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>> We need to keep the 8.11 jobs, but I think they can be disabled. We typically only enable them when we start discussing doing a new patch release?
> >> > >> > >> > >>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>> Le sam. 20 nov. 2021 à 12:51, Uwe Schindler <uwe@thetaphi.de> a écrit :
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> Hi,
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> I setup my usual release tester job on Policeman Jenkins and it succeeded:
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> SUCCESS! [0:19:00.801641]
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> See here for log: https://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Release-Tester/4/console
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> So it looks like technically the release is fine. I will wait a bit with my +1, because I wanted to manually check the artifacts and javadocs first.
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> I also enabled the 9.0 and 9.x builds on Policeman Jenkins (sorry for the delay). At the same time I disabled 8.x builds. If Solr people still need them we can enable them. But I think the only ones we need now are 8.11.x ones, right?
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> Uwe
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> -----
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> Uwe Schindler
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> https://www.thetaphi.de
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > From: Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2021 9:25 AM
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > To: Lucene Dev <dev@lucene.apache.org>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > Subject: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.0.0 RC1
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene 9.0.0.
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > The artifacts can be downloaded from:
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.0.0-RC1-rev-
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > 903ee94dc50643299c15dfa954410f3ee4d62075
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > You can run the smoke tester directly with this command:
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py \
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.0.0-RC1-rev-
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > 903ee94dc50643299c15dfa954410f3ee4d62075
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > The vote will be open until 2021-11-24 09:00 UTC.
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > [ ] +1 approve
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > [ ] +0 no opinion
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > Here is my +1
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > --
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > Adrien
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >> --
> >> > >> > >> > >> Uwe Schindler
> >> > >> > >> > >> Achterdiek 19, 28357 Bremen
> >> > >> > >> > >> https://www.thetaphi.de
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >> > >> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > > Adrien
> >> >
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >> >
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
--
Adrien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
This vote has failed. I started a new vote for a RC2 that includes the
fix for the Luke launch script.
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 2:11 PM Tomoko Uchida
<tomoko.uchida.1111@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Ok, thank you. I backported it to branch_9_0.
>
> Tomoko
>
> 2021?11?22?(?) 21:29 Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com>:
> >
> > Agreed, I'll respin.
> > Tomoko, can you backport your fix to branch_9_0?
> >
> > Le lun. 22 nov. 2021 à 12:42, Dawid Weiss <dawid.weiss@gmail.com> a écrit :
> >>
> >> This is my copy/paste mistake - I work with Unixish shells all the
> >> time but rarely with a user interface and didn't have a chance to
> >> check. Let's see if anything else pops up but this is definitely worth
> >> a respin in my opinion as it's one of the fundamental reasons for the
> >> binary release to exist...
> >>
> >> Dawid
> >>
> >> On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 12:05 PM Tomoko Uchida
> >> <tomoko.uchida.1111@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > SUCCESS! [0:25:27.340580]
> >> >
> >> > I noticed the Luke start script for *nix does not work and pushed a
> >> > fix [1] on main and branch_9x. The launch script for Windows works
> >> > well.
> >> > I am fine with the release candidate - it is a minor shell script bug
> >> > and I think users can easily make a patch - but wanted to give notice
> >> > of that, just in case.
> >> >
> >> > [1] https://github.com/apache/lucene/commit/4193bcbc02313c82afcf8cf9e2d14e47466cb1c3
> >> >
> >> > Tomoko
> >> >
> >> > 2021?11?22?(?) 6:18 Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com>:
> >> > >
> >> > > Fair enough. I don't think this requires respinning so what I'll do is that I'll keep the vote thread open until we have a resolution on the issue.
> >> > >
> >> > > On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 1:29 PM Robert Muir <rcmuir@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> and yes, I think it is reasonable to be a blocker. If we release 9.0,
> >> > >> promising 2 major versions of back compat, some of these options get
> >> > >> removed from the table.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 7:23 AM Robert Muir <rcmuir@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Thanks Ignacio,
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > I see several choices, but the status quo of the testing is the problem.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > One choice is to not make any technical changes, but do something to
> >> > >> > prevent lucene from having to be compatible with 20 different versions
> >> > >> > :) For example, not supporting 2 major versions back would cut it in
> >> > >> > half. Another solution would be to release major versions faster so
> >> > >> > that we churn thru the versions at a more sustainable rate rather than
> >> > >> > having them pile up.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Another option is to technically alter how the testing is done (as
> >> > >> > suggested on the issue). It could mean that some of them only run
> >> > >> > nightly or otherwise in jenkins. Which exact tests? I'm not sure, just
> >> > >> > as long as it becomes reasonable.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 7:18 AM Ignacio Vera <iverase@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > > Your issue has not been ignored but the problem is that the version of the blocker has not been added so it doesn't appear in a search for blockers in Lucene 9 :(
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > > Do we need to discuss this again? I thought we discussed and agreed on increasing our backwards compatibility. My personal opinion is that it is a natural step for mature software that it is increasingly used in production environments.
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > > Regarding your concerns in the subject, there is a healthy discussion in the issue and there are sound proposals to ease the pain and they can be implemented any time, do you think it is still a blocker?
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > > On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 12:59 PM Robert Muir <rcmuir@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> Along the same lines of back compat woes, I'd like to see my blocker
> >> > >> > >> issue about back compat testing addressed in the release candidate,
> >> > >> > >> rather than simply ignored.
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10168
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> With the 9.0 release, we are attempting to *double* our backwards
> >> > >> > >> compatibility guarantees (2 major versions), yet here we are
> >> > >> > >> discussing insane release strategies that can't be guaranteed/tested
> >> > >> > >> to work (8.12-after-9.0-etc), here we are with back compat tests
> >> > >> > >> taking a minute and half on branch_9_0! Imagine how long they will
> >> > >> > >> take for branch_9_9!
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> When it comes to more back compat, people are quick to demand more of
> >> > >> > >> it every time. But when it comes to addressing the necessary issues to
> >> > >> > >> make it work...crickets.
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 5:11 AM Robert Muir <rcmuir@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> > >> >
> >> > >> > >> > -1 to release lucene 9.0, as long as branch_8x remains.
> >> > >> > >> >
> >> > >> > >> > I know you made a separate thread for this, but it is a real problem.
> >> > >> > >> >
> >> > >> > >> > The problem is that we can't support backwards compatibility like
> >> > >> > >> > this: releasing 9.0 then 8.12's and stuff. It isn't how the back
> >> > >> > >> > compat testing works, it is completely cowboy and unsupported.
> >> > >> > >> >
> >> > >> > >> > On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 9:19 AM Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > >> > > I think we should remove it but I remember it was controversial in the past. I'll start a separate thread.
> >> > >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > >> > > Le sam. 20 nov. 2021 à 14:38, Uwe Schindler <uwe@thetaphi.de> a écrit :
> >> > >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> > >> Yes. But we won't have a 8.12 release so I assume the branch_8x is dead. Maybe we should dass a note to it's readme or delete it?
> >> > >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> > >> Uwe
> >> > >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> > >> Am 20. November 2021 13:15:23 UTC schrieb Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com>:
> >> > >> > >> > >>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>> We need to keep the 8.11 jobs, but I think they can be disabled. We typically only enable them when we start discussing doing a new patch release?
> >> > >> > >> > >>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>> Le sam. 20 nov. 2021 à 12:51, Uwe Schindler <uwe@thetaphi.de> a écrit :
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> Hi,
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> I setup my usual release tester job on Policeman Jenkins and it succeeded:
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> SUCCESS! [0:19:00.801641]
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> See here for log: https://jenkins.thetaphi.de/job/Lucene-Release-Tester/4/console
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> So it looks like technically the release is fine. I will wait a bit with my +1, because I wanted to manually check the artifacts and javadocs first.
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> I also enabled the 9.0 and 9.x builds on Policeman Jenkins (sorry for the delay). At the same time I disabled 8.x builds. If Solr people still need them we can enable them. But I think the only ones we need now are 8.11.x ones, right?
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> Uwe
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> -----
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> Uwe Schindler
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> https://www.thetaphi.de
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > From: Adrien Grand <jpountz@gmail.com>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2021 9:25 AM
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > To: Lucene Dev <dev@lucene.apache.org>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > Subject: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.0.0 RC1
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene 9.0.0.
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > The artifacts can be downloaded from:
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.0.0-RC1-rev-
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > 903ee94dc50643299c15dfa954410f3ee4d62075
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > You can run the smoke tester directly with this command:
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py \
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-9.0.0-RC1-rev-
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > 903ee94dc50643299c15dfa954410f3ee4d62075
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > The vote will be open until 2021-11-24 09:00 UTC.
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > [ ] +1 approve
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > [ ] +0 no opinion
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > Here is my +1
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > --
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > Adrien
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> >
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >> > >> > >> > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >> > >> > >> > >>>>
> >> > >> > >> > >> --
> >> > >> > >> > >> Uwe Schindler
> >> > >> > >> > >> Achterdiek 19, 28357 Bremen
> >> > >> > >> > >> https://www.thetaphi.de
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >> > >> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > > Adrien
> >> >
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >> >
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
--
Adrien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org