Granroth, Neal V.
2012-08-08, 19:07
Prescott Nasser
2012-08-08, 20:00
xzxz@...)
2012-08-08, 20:07
Christopher Currens
2012-08-08, 20:12
Christopher Currens
2012-08-08, 20:20
Granroth, Neal V.
2012-08-08, 20:33
Christopher Currens
2012-08-08, 20:35
Prescott Nasser
2012-08-08, 21:23
Christopher Currens
2012-08-08, 23:22
Prescott Nasser
2012-08-08, 23:27
Michael Herndon
2012-08-09, 00:41
Christopher Currens
2012-08-09, 05:43
Michael Herndon
2012-08-09, 18:44
Prescott Nasser
2012-08-11, 18:22
Granroth, Neal V.
2012-08-13, 19:53
Christopher Currens
2012-08-13, 20:07
-
Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issuesGranroth, Neal V. 2012-08-08, 19:07
I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln in the VS2010 folder.
This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it was created with a newer version.
Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with VS2012 (a not yet released product)
It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution limit themselves to released development tools only.
It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions; they certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
- Neal G.
This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it was created with a newer version.
Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with VS2012 (a not yet released product)
It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution limit themselves to released development tools only.
It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions; they certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
- Neal G.
-
RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issuesPrescott Nasser 2012-08-08, 20:00
I use VS2010 and they opened fine for me to cut the pre-release nuget packages. I'll try to take a in the next day or two to see if I can't move that back to a VS2010 package.
I wouldn't have an issue with a VS2012 solution file - as long as it was in VS2012 build folder, not the VS2010 folder; and we had a VS2010 solution.
Thanks for the heads up
~P
----------------------------------------
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 12:07:34 -0700
> Subject: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>
> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln in the VS2010 folder.
>
> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it was created with a newer version.
> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with VS2012 (a not yet released product)
>
> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution limit themselves to released development tools only.
>
> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions; they certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
>
> - Neal G.
>
I wouldn't have an issue with a VS2012 solution file - as long as it was in VS2012 build folder, not the VS2010 folder; and we had a VS2010 solution.
Thanks for the heads up
~P
----------------------------------------
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 12:07:34 -0700
> Subject: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>
> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln in the VS2010 folder.
>
> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it was created with a newer version.
> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with VS2012 (a not yet released product)
>
> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution limit themselves to released development tools only.
>
> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions; they certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
>
> - Neal G.
>
-
Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issuesxzxz@...) 2012-08-08, 20:07
08.08.2012 23:07, Granroth, Neal V. пишет:
> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln in the VS2010 folder.
>
> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it was created with a newer version.
> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with VS2012 (a not yet released product)
>
> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution limit themselves to released development tools only.
>
> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions; they certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
>
> - Neal G.
>
>
>
+1
> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln in the VS2010 folder.
>
> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it was created with a newer version.
> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with VS2012 (a not yet released product)
>
> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution limit themselves to released development tools only.
>
> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions; they certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
>
> - Neal G.
>
>
>
+1
-
Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issuesChristopher Currens 2012-08-08, 20:12
See inline comments.
Thanks,
Christopher
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln in
> the VS2010 folder.
>
> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm not even
sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is very, very out
of date.
> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it was
> created with a newer version.
> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with
> VS2012 (a not yet released product)
>
> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it away. I
believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to VS2010
manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 support back
in. In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and forgot to
change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution files are (or
at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010. On my laptop,
which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine.
> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution
> limit themselves to released development tools only.
>
> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue.
> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions; they
> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
>
Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you need to worry
about this.
>
> - Neal G.
>
>
Thanks,
Christopher
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln in
> the VS2010 folder.
>
> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm not even
sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is very, very out
of date.
> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it was
> created with a newer version.
> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with
> VS2012 (a not yet released product)
>
> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it away. I
believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to VS2010
manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 support back
in. In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and forgot to
change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution files are (or
at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010. On my laptop,
which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine.
> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution
> limit themselves to released development tools only.
>
> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue.
> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions; they
> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
>
Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you need to worry
about this.
>
> - Neal G.
>
>
-
Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issuesChristopher Currens 2012-08-08, 20:20
FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and added VS2012
directory/solution files.
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> See inline comments.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Christopher
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
>> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln in
>> the VS2010 folder.
>>
>> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm not
> even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is very, very
> out of date.
>
>
>> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it
>> was created with a newer version.
>> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with
>> VS2012 (a not yet released product)
>>
>> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it away. I
> believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to VS2010
> manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 support back
> in. In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and forgot to
> change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution files are (or
> at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010. On my laptop,
> which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine.
>
>
>> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution
>> limit themselves to released development tools only.
>>
>> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue.
>
>
>> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions; they
>> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
>>
>
> Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you need to
> worry about this.
>
>
>>
>> - Neal G.
>>
>>
>
directory/solution files.
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> See inline comments.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Christopher
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
>> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln in
>> the VS2010 folder.
>>
>> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm not
> even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is very, very
> out of date.
>
>
>> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it
>> was created with a newer version.
>> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with
>> VS2012 (a not yet released product)
>>
>> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it away. I
> believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to VS2010
> manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 support back
> in. In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and forgot to
> change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution files are (or
> at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010. On my laptop,
> which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine.
>
>
>> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution
>> limit themselves to released development tools only.
>>
>> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue.
>
>
>> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions; they
>> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
>>
>
> Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you need to
> worry about this.
>
>
>>
>> - Neal G.
>>
>>
>
-
RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issuesGranroth, Neal V. 2012-08-08, 20:33
Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the current work-in-progress.
Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for those that rely upon the binary packages.
- Neal
-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Currens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and added VS2012
directory/solution files.
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> See inline comments.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Christopher
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
>> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln in
>> the VS2010 folder.
>>
>> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm not
> even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is very, very
> out of date.
>
>
>> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it
>> was created with a newer version.
>> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with
>> VS2012 (a not yet released product)
>>
>> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it away. I
> believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to VS2010
> manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 support back
> in. In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and forgot to
> change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution files are (or
> at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010. On my laptop,
> which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine.
>
>
>> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution
>> limit themselves to released development tools only.
>>
>> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue.
>
>
>> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions; they
>> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
>>
>
> Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you need to
> worry about this.
>
>
>>
>> - Neal G.
>>
>>
>
Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for those that rely upon the binary packages.
- Neal
-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Currens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and added VS2012
directory/solution files.
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> See inline comments.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Christopher
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
>> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln in
>> the VS2010 folder.
>>
>> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm not
> even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is very, very
> out of date.
>
>
>> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it
>> was created with a newer version.
>> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with
>> VS2012 (a not yet released product)
>>
>> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it away. I
> believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to VS2010
> manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 support back
> in. In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and forgot to
> change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution files are (or
> at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010. On my laptop,
> which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine.
>
>
>> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution
>> limit themselves to released development tools only.
>>
>> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue.
>
>
>> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions; they
>> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
>>
>
> Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you need to
> worry about this.
>
>
>>
>> - Neal G.
>>
>>
>
-
Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issuesChristopher Currens 2012-08-08, 20:35
Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more
issues/concerns.
Thanks,
Christopher
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
> incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the current
> work-in-progress.
>
> Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for those
> that rely upon the binary packages.
>
> - Neal
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Currens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>
> FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and added VS2012
> directory/solution files.
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
>
> > See inline comments.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Christopher
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
> >> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln
> in
> >> the VS2010 folder.
> >>
> >> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm not
> > even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is very,
> very
> > out of date.
> >
> >
> >> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it
> >> was created with a newer version.
> >> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with
> >> VS2012 (a not yet released product)
> >>
> >> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it away. I
> > believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to VS2010
> > manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 support back
> > in. In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and forgot
> to
> > change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution files are
> (or
> > at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010. On my laptop,
> > which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine.
> >
> >
> >> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution
> >> limit themselves to released development tools only.
> >>
> >> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue.
> >
> >
> >> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions;
> they
> >> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
> >>
> >
> > Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you need to
> > worry about this.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> - Neal G.
> >>
> >>
> >
>
issues/concerns.
Thanks,
Christopher
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
> incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the current
> work-in-progress.
>
> Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for those
> that rely upon the binary packages.
>
> - Neal
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Currens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>
> FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and added VS2012
> directory/solution files.
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
>
> > See inline comments.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Christopher
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
> >> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln
> in
> >> the VS2010 folder.
> >>
> >> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm not
> > even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is very,
> very
> > out of date.
> >
> >
> >> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it
> >> was created with a newer version.
> >> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with
> >> VS2012 (a not yet released product)
> >>
> >> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it away. I
> > believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to VS2010
> > manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 support back
> > in. In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and forgot
> to
> > change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution files are
> (or
> > at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010. On my laptop,
> > which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine.
> >
> >
> >> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution
> >> limit themselves to released development tools only.
> >>
> >> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue.
> >
> >
> >> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions;
> they
> >> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
> >>
> >
> > Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you need to
> > worry about this.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> - Neal G.
> >>
> >>
> >
>
-
RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issuesPrescott Nasser 2012-08-08, 21:23
I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to date. Anything in trunk should be there
Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Christopher Currens
Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more
issues/concerns.
Thanks,
Christopher
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
> incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the current
> work-in-progress.
>
> Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for those
> that rely upon the binary packages.
>
> - Neal
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Currens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>
> FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and added VS2012
> directory/solution files.
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
>
> > See inline comments.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Christopher
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
> >> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln
> in
> >> the VS2010 folder.
> >>
> >> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm not
> > even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is very,
> very
> > out of date.
> >
> >
> >> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it
> >> was created with a newer version.
> >> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with
> >> VS2012 (a not yet released product)
> >>
> >> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it away. I
> > believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to VS2010
> > manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 support back
> > in. In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and forgot
> to
> > change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution files are
> (or
> > at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010. On my laptop,
> > which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine.
> >
> >
> >> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution
> >> limit themselves to released development tools only.
> >>
> >> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue.
> >
> >
> >> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions;
> they
> >> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
> >>
> >
> > Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you need to
> > worry about this.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> - Neal G.
> >>
> >>
> >
>
Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Christopher Currens
Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more
issues/concerns.
Thanks,
Christopher
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
> incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the current
> work-in-progress.
>
> Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for those
> that rely upon the binary packages.
>
> - Neal
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Currens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>
> FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and added VS2012
> directory/solution files.
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
>
> > See inline comments.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Christopher
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
> >> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file Lucene.Net.Core.sln
> in
> >> the VS2010 folder.
> >>
> >> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm not
> > even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is very,
> very
> > out of date.
> >
> >
> >> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it
> >> was created with a newer version.
> >> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with
> >> VS2012 (a not yet released product)
> >>
> >> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it away. I
> > believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to VS2010
> > manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 support back
> > in. In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and forgot
> to
> > change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution files are
> (or
> > at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010. On my laptop,
> > which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine.
> >
> >
> >> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution
> >> limit themselves to released development tools only.
> >>
> >> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue.
> >
> >
> >> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions;
> they
> >> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
> >>
> >
> > Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you need to
> > worry about this.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> - Neal G.
> >>
> >>
> >
>
-
Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issuesChristopher Currens 2012-08-08, 23:22
Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had forgotten
about that.
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to date.
> Anything in trunk should be there
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: Christopher Currens
> Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>
> Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more
> issues/concerns.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Christopher
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
> > incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the
> current
> > work-in-progress.
> >
> > Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for those
> > that rely upon the binary packages.
> >
> > - Neal
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Christopher Currens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> >
> > FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and added
> VS2012
> > directory/solution files.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > See inline comments.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Christopher
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
> > >> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file
> Lucene.Net.Core.sln
> > in
> > >> the VS2010 folder.
> > >>
> > >> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm not
> > > even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is very,
> > very
> > > out of date.
> > >
> > >
> > >> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it
> > >> was created with a newer version.
> > >> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with
> > >> VS2012 (a not yet released product)
> > >>
> > >> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it away. I
> > > believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to VS2010
> > > manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 support
> back
> > > in. In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and forgot
> > to
> > > change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution files are
> > (or
> > > at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010. On my
> laptop,
> > > which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine.
> > >
> > >
> > >> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution
> > >> limit themselves to released development tools only.
> > >>
> > >> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue.
> > >
> > >
> > >> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions;
> > they
> > >> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
> > >>
> > >
> > > Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you need to
> > > worry about this.
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> - Neal G.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
about that.
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to date.
> Anything in trunk should be there
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: Christopher Currens
> Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>
> Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more
> issues/concerns.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Christopher
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
> > incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the
> current
> > work-in-progress.
> >
> > Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for those
> > that rely upon the binary packages.
> >
> > - Neal
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Christopher Currens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> >
> > FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and added
> VS2012
> > directory/solution files.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > See inline comments.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Christopher
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
> > >> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file
> Lucene.Net.Core.sln
> > in
> > >> the VS2010 folder.
> > >>
> > >> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm not
> > > even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is very,
> > very
> > > out of date.
> > >
> > >
> > >> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it
> > >> was created with a newer version.
> > >> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with
> > >> VS2012 (a not yet released product)
> > >>
> > >> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it away. I
> > > believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to VS2010
> > > manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 support
> back
> > > in. In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and forgot
> > to
> > > change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution files are
> > (or
> > > at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010. On my
> laptop,
> > > which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine.
> > >
> > >
> > >> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution
> > >> limit themselves to released development tools only.
> > >>
> > >> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue.
> > >
> > >
> > >> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions;
> > they
> > >> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
> > >>
> > >
> > > Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you need to
> > > worry about this.
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> - Neal G.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
-
RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issuesPrescott Nasser 2012-08-08, 23:27
Yes
Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Christopher Currens
Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had forgotten
about that.
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to date.
> Anything in trunk should be there
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: Christopher Currens
> Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>
> Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more
> issues/concerns.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Christopher
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
> > incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the
> current
> > work-in-progress.
> >
> > Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for those
> > that rely upon the binary packages.
> >
> > - Neal
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Christopher Currens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> >
> > FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and added
> VS2012
> > directory/solution files.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > See inline comments.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Christopher
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
> > >> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file
> Lucene.Net.Core.sln
> > in
> > >> the VS2010 folder.
> > >>
> > >> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm not
> > > even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is very,
> > very
> > > out of date.
> > >
> > >
> > >> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it
> > >> was created with a newer version.
> > >> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with
> > >> VS2012 (a not yet released product)
> > >>
> > >> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it away. I
> > > believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to VS2010
> > > manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 support
> back
> > > in. In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and forgot
> > to
> > > change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution files are
> > (or
> > > at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010. On my
> laptop,
> > > which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine.
> > >
> > >
> > >> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution
> > >> limit themselves to released development tools only.
> > >>
> > >> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue.
> > >
> > >
> > >> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions;
> > they
> > >> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
> > >>
> > >
> > > Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you need to
> > > worry about this.
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> - Neal G.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Christopher Currens
Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had forgotten
about that.
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to date.
> Anything in trunk should be there
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: Christopher Currens
> Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>
> Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more
> issues/concerns.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Christopher
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
> > incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the
> current
> > work-in-progress.
> >
> > Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for those
> > that rely upon the binary packages.
> >
> > - Neal
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Christopher Currens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> >
> > FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and added
> VS2012
> > directory/solution files.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > See inline comments.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Christopher
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
> > >> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file
> Lucene.Net.Core.sln
> > in
> > >> the VS2010 folder.
> > >>
> > >> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm not
> > > even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is very,
> > very
> > > out of date.
> > >
> > >
> > >> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that it
> > >> was created with a newer version.
> > >> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created with
> > >> VS2012 (a not yet released product)
> > >>
> > >> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it away. I
> > > believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to VS2010
> > > manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 support
> back
> > > in. In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and forgot
> > to
> > > change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution files are
> > (or
> > > at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010. On my
> laptop,
> > > which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine.
> > >
> > >
> > >> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source distribution
> > >> limit themselves to released development tools only.
> > >>
> > >> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue.
> > >
> > >
> > >> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions;
> > they
> > >> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
> > >>
> > >
> > > Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you need to
> > > worry about this.
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> - Neal G.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
-
Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issuesMichael Herndon 2012-08-09, 00:41
I think it's usually the project files that are backwards compatible not
the solution files. So you need a solution for each vs version but should
be able to keep the proj files the same.
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Yes
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: Christopher Currens
> Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>
> Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had forgotten
> about that.
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >wrote:
>
> > I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to date.
> > Anything in trunk should be there
> >
> > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > ________________________________
> > From: Christopher Currens
> > Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more
> > issues/concerns.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Christopher
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
> > > incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the
> > current
> > > work-in-progress.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for
> those
> > > that rely upon the binary packages.
> > >
> > > - Neal
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Christopher Currens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > >
> > > FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and added
> > VS2012
> > > directory/solution files.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > See inline comments.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Christopher
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
> > > >> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file
> > Lucene.Net.Core.sln
> > > in
> > > >> the VS2010 folder.
> > > >>
> > > >> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm
> not
> > > > even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is
> very,
> > > very
> > > > out of date.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that
> it
> > > >> was created with a newer version.
> > > >> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created
> with
> > > >> VS2012 (a not yet released product)
> > > >>
> > > >> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it away.
> I
> > > > believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to VS2010
> > > > manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 support
> > back
> > > > in. In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and
> forgot
> > > to
> > > > change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution files
> are
> > > (or
> > > > at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010. On my
> > laptop,
> > > > which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source
> distribution
> > > >> limit themselves to released development tools only.
> > > >>
> > > >> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions;
> > > they
> > > >> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you need to
the solution files. So you need a solution for each vs version but should
be able to keep the proj files the same.
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Yes
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: Christopher Currens
> Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>
> Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had forgotten
> about that.
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >wrote:
>
> > I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to date.
> > Anything in trunk should be there
> >
> > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > ________________________________
> > From: Christopher Currens
> > Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more
> > issues/concerns.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Christopher
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
> > > incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the
> > current
> > > work-in-progress.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for
> those
> > > that rely upon the binary packages.
> > >
> > > - Neal
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Christopher Currens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > >
> > > FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and added
> > VS2012
> > > directory/solution files.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > See inline comments.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Christopher
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered an
> > > >> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file
> > Lucene.Net.Core.sln
> > > in
> > > >> the VS2010 folder.
> > > >>
> > > >> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm
> not
> > > > even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is
> very,
> > > very
> > > > out of date.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains that
> it
> > > >> was created with a newer version.
> > > >> Opening the solution file in notepad reveals that it was created
> with
> > > >> VS2012 (a not yet released product)
> > > >>
> > > >> They are supposed to be VS2010, if the pathing didn't give it away.
> I
> > > > believe it was my fault, as I usually will change them back to VS2010
> > > > manually, but forgot to do that while I was adding .NET 3.5 support
> > back
> > > > in. In order to automate the change, I needed to use the RC and
> forgot
> > > to
> > > > change the solution files back. As an aside, VS2012 solution files
> are
> > > (or
> > > > at least supposed to be) backwards compatible with VS2010. On my
> > laptop,
> > > > which only has VS2010 SP1, they open and compile just fine.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> It would be very helpful if those maintaining the source
> distribution
> > > >> limit themselves to released development tools only.
> > > >>
> > > >> Since that's our normal policy, this isn't really an issue.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> It also make me wonder of the viability of any binary distributions;
> > > they
> > > >> certainly should not have been created with VS2012RC
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > Prescott used VS2010 to make the binary, so I don't think you need to
-
Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issuesChristopher Currens 2012-08-09, 05:43
It used to be that way. VS2012 is the first version that produces
backwards compatible projects *and* solutions. There's an msdn blog
entry[1] that discusses it. It does focus more projects, but starts with
discussing solutions and how having it all backwards compatible would ease
transitions for most companies. There are a few project types that aren't
backwards compatible, but I think the solution will still open in both,
with a notification that it can't load the project type.
Excerpt: "In other words, we now have project round-tripping capability so
you can work with the latest features but still keep the solution
compatible with team members using an older version of Visual Studio."
Anyway, it's about time they did this. Supporting multiple versions of VS
files has been an annoying missing feature.
[1]
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/zainnab/archive/2012/06/05/visual-studio-2012-compatibility-aka-project-round-tripping.aspx
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Michael Herndon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> I think it's usually the project files that are backwards compatible not
> the solution files. So you need a solution for each vs version but should
> be able to keep the proj files the same.
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >wrote:
>
> > Yes
> >
> > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > ________________________________
> > From: Christopher Currens
> > Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> >
> > Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had
> forgotten
> > about that.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to date.
> > > Anything in trunk should be there
> > >
> > > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Christopher Currens
> > > Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > >
> > > Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more
> > > issues/concerns.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Christopher
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
> > > > incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the
> > > current
> > > > work-in-progress.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for
> > those
> > > > that rely upon the binary packages.
> > > >
> > > > - Neal
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Christopher Currens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM
> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > > >
> > > > FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and added
> > > VS2012
> > > > directory/solution files.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > See inline comments.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Christopher
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered
> an
> > > > >> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file
> > > Lucene.Net.Core.sln
> > > > in
> > > > >> the VS2010 folder.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm
> > not
> > > > > even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is
> > very,
> > > > very
> > > > > out of date.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains
> that
> > it
> > > > >> was created with a newer version.
backwards compatible projects *and* solutions. There's an msdn blog
entry[1] that discusses it. It does focus more projects, but starts with
discussing solutions and how having it all backwards compatible would ease
transitions for most companies. There are a few project types that aren't
backwards compatible, but I think the solution will still open in both,
with a notification that it can't load the project type.
Excerpt: "In other words, we now have project round-tripping capability so
you can work with the latest features but still keep the solution
compatible with team members using an older version of Visual Studio."
Anyway, it's about time they did this. Supporting multiple versions of VS
files has been an annoying missing feature.
[1]
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/zainnab/archive/2012/06/05/visual-studio-2012-compatibility-aka-project-round-tripping.aspx
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Michael Herndon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> I think it's usually the project files that are backwards compatible not
> the solution files. So you need a solution for each vs version but should
> be able to keep the proj files the same.
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >wrote:
>
> > Yes
> >
> > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > ________________________________
> > From: Christopher Currens
> > Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> >
> > Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had
> forgotten
> > about that.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to date.
> > > Anything in trunk should be there
> > >
> > > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Christopher Currens
> > > Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > >
> > > Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more
> > > issues/concerns.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Christopher
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
> > > > incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the
> > > current
> > > > work-in-progress.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for
> > those
> > > > that rely upon the binary packages.
> > > >
> > > > - Neal
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Christopher Currens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM
> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > > >
> > > > FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and added
> > > VS2012
> > > > directory/solution files.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > See inline comments.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Christopher
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> I just pulled down the 3.0.3 branch from SVN and have encountered
> an
> > > > >> initial problem with the VisualStudio solution file
> > > Lucene.Net.Core.sln
> > > > in
> > > > >> the VS2010 folder.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Did you pull down the 3.0.3 branch or trunk? Trunk is 3.0.3, I'm
> > not
> > > > > even sure the 3.0.3 branch exists anymore, and if it does, it is
> > very,
> > > > very
> > > > > out of date.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >> This solution will not load in VS2010, Visual Studio complains
> that
> > it
> > > > >> was created with a newer version.
-
Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issuesMichael Herndon 2012-08-09, 18:44
oooooooo, the nifty new vs feature find of the day goes to Mr. Currens.
I've been using it for tons of JavaScript style development with requireJS,
kendo, my own set of scripts, and custom stuff for the day job. It actually
provides intellisense for JS inheritance so life is good.
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Christopher Currens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> It used to be that way. VS2012 is the first version that produces
> backwards compatible projects *and* solutions. There's an msdn blog
> entry[1] that discusses it. It does focus more projects, but starts with
> discussing solutions and how having it all backwards compatible would ease
> transitions for most companies. There are a few project types that aren't
> backwards compatible, but I think the solution will still open in both,
> with a notification that it can't load the project type.
>
> Excerpt: "In other words, we now have project round-tripping capability so
> you can work with the latest features but still keep the solution
> compatible with team members using an older version of Visual Studio."
>
> Anyway, it's about time they did this. Supporting multiple versions of VS
> files has been an annoying missing feature.
>
> [1]
>
> http://blogs.msdn.com/b/zainnab/archive/2012/06/05/visual-studio-2012-compatibility-aka-project-round-tripping.aspx
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Michael Herndon <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
>
> > I think it's usually the project files that are backwards compatible not
> > the solution files. So you need a solution for each vs version but should
> > be able to keep the proj files the same.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Yes
> > >
> > > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Christopher Currens
> > > Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > >
> > > Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had
> > forgotten
> > > about that.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to
> date.
> > > > Anything in trunk should be there
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: Christopher Currens
> > > > Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM
> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more
> > > > issues/concerns.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Christopher
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
> > > > > incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the
> > > > current
> > > > > work-in-progress.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for
> > > those
> > > > > that rely upon the binary packages.
> > > > >
> > > > > - Neal
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Christopher Currens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM
> > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > > > >
> > > > > FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and
> added
> > > > VS2012
> > > > > directory/solution files.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <
> > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > See inline comments.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Christopher
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've been using it for tons of JavaScript style development with requireJS,
kendo, my own set of scripts, and custom stuff for the day job. It actually
provides intellisense for JS inheritance so life is good.
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Christopher Currens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> It used to be that way. VS2012 is the first version that produces
> backwards compatible projects *and* solutions. There's an msdn blog
> entry[1] that discusses it. It does focus more projects, but starts with
> discussing solutions and how having it all backwards compatible would ease
> transitions for most companies. There are a few project types that aren't
> backwards compatible, but I think the solution will still open in both,
> with a notification that it can't load the project type.
>
> Excerpt: "In other words, we now have project round-tripping capability so
> you can work with the latest features but still keep the solution
> compatible with team members using an older version of Visual Studio."
>
> Anyway, it's about time they did this. Supporting multiple versions of VS
> files has been an annoying missing feature.
>
> [1]
>
> http://blogs.msdn.com/b/zainnab/archive/2012/06/05/visual-studio-2012-compatibility-aka-project-round-tripping.aspx
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Michael Herndon <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
>
> > I think it's usually the project files that are backwards compatible not
> > the solution files. So you need a solution for each vs version but should
> > be able to keep the proj files the same.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Yes
> > >
> > > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Christopher Currens
> > > Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > >
> > > Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had
> > forgotten
> > > about that.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to
> date.
> > > > Anything in trunk should be there
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: Christopher Currens
> > > > Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM
> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more
> > > > issues/concerns.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Christopher
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
> > > > > incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the
> > > > current
> > > > > work-in-progress.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for
> > > those
> > > > > that rely upon the binary packages.
> > > > >
> > > > > - Neal
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Christopher Currens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 3:21 PM
> > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > > > >
> > > > > FYI - SVN has been updated with corrected VS2010 solutions and
> added
> > > > VS2012
> > > > > directory/solution files.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Christopher Currens <
> > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > See inline comments.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Christopher
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-
RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issuesPrescott Nasser 2012-08-11, 18:22
Alright - I see Chris updated the 3.0.3 branch with the solution files and a quick fix for the NativeFSLockFactory. We've had some people downloading the pre-release packages (Lucene.Net.Contrib 11 times, Lucene.Net 23 times). Mostly all quiet regarding issues. Unless there are any issues outstanding, lets call it good, run RAT on the 3.0.3 branch to fix any issues about headers, update the changelog files to represent the changes in 3.0.3 from 2.9.4 ~P
> Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 14:44:01 -0400
> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> oooooooo, the nifty new vs feature find of the day goes to Mr. Currens.
>
> I've been using it for tons of JavaScript style development with requireJS,
> kendo, my own set of scripts, and custom stuff for the day job. It actually
> provides intellisense for JS inheritance so life is good.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Christopher Currens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
>
> > It used to be that way. VS2012 is the first version that produces
> > backwards compatible projects *and* solutions. There's an msdn blog
> > entry[1] that discusses it. It does focus more projects, but starts with
> > discussing solutions and how having it all backwards compatible would ease
> > transitions for most companies. There are a few project types that aren't
> > backwards compatible, but I think the solution will still open in both,
> > with a notification that it can't load the project type.
> >
> > Excerpt: "In other words, we now have project round-tripping capability so
> > you can work with the latest features but still keep the solution
> > compatible with team members using an older version of Visual Studio."
> >
> > Anyway, it's about time they did this. Supporting multiple versions of VS
> > files has been an annoying missing feature.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> > http://blogs.msdn.com/b/zainnab/archive/2012/06/05/visual-studio-2012-compatibility-aka-project-round-tripping.aspx
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Michael Herndon <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > I think it's usually the project files that are backwards compatible not
> > > the solution files. So you need a solution for each vs version but should
> > > be able to keep the proj files the same.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: Christopher Currens
> > > > Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM
> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > > >
> > > > Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had
> > > forgotten
> > > > about that.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to
> > date.
> > > > > Anything in trunk should be there
> > > > >
> > > > > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > From: Christopher Currens
> > > > > Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM
> > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more
> > > > > issues/concerns.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Christopher
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
> > > > > > incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the
> > > > > current
> > > > > > work-in-progress.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for
> > > > those
> > > > > > that rely upon the binary packages.
> > > > > >
>
> Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 14:44:01 -0400
> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> oooooooo, the nifty new vs feature find of the day goes to Mr. Currens.
>
> I've been using it for tons of JavaScript style development with requireJS,
> kendo, my own set of scripts, and custom stuff for the day job. It actually
> provides intellisense for JS inheritance so life is good.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Christopher Currens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
>
> > It used to be that way. VS2012 is the first version that produces
> > backwards compatible projects *and* solutions. There's an msdn blog
> > entry[1] that discusses it. It does focus more projects, but starts with
> > discussing solutions and how having it all backwards compatible would ease
> > transitions for most companies. There are a few project types that aren't
> > backwards compatible, but I think the solution will still open in both,
> > with a notification that it can't load the project type.
> >
> > Excerpt: "In other words, we now have project round-tripping capability so
> > you can work with the latest features but still keep the solution
> > compatible with team members using an older version of Visual Studio."
> >
> > Anyway, it's about time they did this. Supporting multiple versions of VS
> > files has been an annoying missing feature.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> > http://blogs.msdn.com/b/zainnab/archive/2012/06/05/visual-studio-2012-compatibility-aka-project-round-tripping.aspx
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Michael Herndon <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > I think it's usually the project files that are backwards compatible not
> > > the solution files. So you need a solution for each vs version but should
> > > be able to keep the proj files the same.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: Christopher Currens
> > > > Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM
> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > > >
> > > > Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had
> > > forgotten
> > > > about that.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to
> > date.
> > > > > Anything in trunk should be there
> > > > >
> > > > > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > From: Christopher Currens
> > > > > Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM
> > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more
> > > > > issues/concerns.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Christopher
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Granroth, Neal V. <
> > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Yes I pulled from the branch not the trunk. I apparently made the
> > > > > > incorrect assumption that it would be slightly more stable than the
> > > > > current
> > > > > > work-in-progress.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for the quick attention and clarifications. Especially for
> > > > those
> > > > > > that rely upon the binary packages.
> > > > > >
>
-
RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issuesGranroth, Neal V. 2012-08-13, 19:53
Thanks for the updated VS2010 solution files.
Lucene.Net.Core builds without a problem.
Lucene.Net.Demo encounters 12 errors and will not build.
All 12 are the same error and all are in IndexHtml.cs:
Non-invocable member 'Lucene.Net.Index.TermEnum.Term' cannot be used like a method.
An example is this statement, line 139:
reader.DeleteDocuments(uidIter.Term());
Term is apparently now a property, no longer a function.
- Neal
-----Original Message-----
From: Prescott Nasser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2012 1:23 PM
To: Lucene Developers; Lucene Users
Subject: RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
Alright - I see Chris updated the 3.0.3 branch with the solution files and a quick fix for the NativeFSLockFactory. We've had some people downloading the pre-release packages (Lucene.Net.Contrib 11 times, Lucene.Net 23 times). Mostly all quiet regarding issues. Unless there are any issues outstanding, lets call it good, run RAT on the 3.0.3 branch to fix any issues about headers, update the changelog files to represent the changes in 3.0.3 from 2.9.4 ~P
> Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 14:44:01 -0400
> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> oooooooo, the nifty new vs feature find of the day goes to Mr. Currens.
>
> I've been using it for tons of JavaScript style development with requireJS,
> kendo, my own set of scripts, and custom stuff for the day job. It actually
> provides intellisense for JS inheritance so life is good.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Christopher Currens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
>
> > It used to be that way. VS2012 is the first version that produces
> > backwards compatible projects *and* solutions. There's an msdn blog
> > entry[1] that discusses it. It does focus more projects, but starts with
> > discussing solutions and how having it all backwards compatible would ease
> > transitions for most companies. There are a few project types that aren't
> > backwards compatible, but I think the solution will still open in both,
> > with a notification that it can't load the project type.
> >
> > Excerpt: "In other words, we now have project round-tripping capability so
> > you can work with the latest features but still keep the solution
> > compatible with team members using an older version of Visual Studio."
> >
> > Anyway, it's about time they did this. Supporting multiple versions of VS
> > files has been an annoying missing feature.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> > http://blogs.msdn.com/b/zainnab/archive/2012/06/05/visual-studio-2012-compatibility-aka-project-round-tripping.aspx
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Michael Herndon <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > I think it's usually the project files that are backwards compatible not
> > > the solution files. So you need a solution for each vs version but should
> > > be able to keep the proj files the same.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: Christopher Currens
> > > > Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM
> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > > >
> > > > Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had
> > > forgotten
> > > > about that.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to
> > date.
> > > > > Anything in trunk should be there
> > > > >
> > > > > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > From: Christopher Currens
> > > > > Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM
> > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more
Lucene.Net.Core builds without a problem.
Lucene.Net.Demo encounters 12 errors and will not build.
All 12 are the same error and all are in IndexHtml.cs:
Non-invocable member 'Lucene.Net.Index.TermEnum.Term' cannot be used like a method.
An example is this statement, line 139:
reader.DeleteDocuments(uidIter.Term());
Term is apparently now a property, no longer a function.
- Neal
-----Original Message-----
From: Prescott Nasser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2012 1:23 PM
To: Lucene Developers; Lucene Users
Subject: RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
Alright - I see Chris updated the 3.0.3 branch with the solution files and a quick fix for the NativeFSLockFactory. We've had some people downloading the pre-release packages (Lucene.Net.Contrib 11 times, Lucene.Net 23 times). Mostly all quiet regarding issues. Unless there are any issues outstanding, lets call it good, run RAT on the 3.0.3 branch to fix any issues about headers, update the changelog files to represent the changes in 3.0.3 from 2.9.4 ~P
> Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 14:44:01 -0400
> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> oooooooo, the nifty new vs feature find of the day goes to Mr. Currens.
>
> I've been using it for tons of JavaScript style development with requireJS,
> kendo, my own set of scripts, and custom stuff for the day job. It actually
> provides intellisense for JS inheritance so life is good.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Christopher Currens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
>
> > It used to be that way. VS2012 is the first version that produces
> > backwards compatible projects *and* solutions. There's an msdn blog
> > entry[1] that discusses it. It does focus more projects, but starts with
> > discussing solutions and how having it all backwards compatible would ease
> > transitions for most companies. There are a few project types that aren't
> > backwards compatible, but I think the solution will still open in both,
> > with a notification that it can't load the project type.
> >
> > Excerpt: "In other words, we now have project round-tripping capability so
> > you can work with the latest features but still keep the solution
> > compatible with team members using an older version of Visual Studio."
> >
> > Anyway, it's about time they did this. Supporting multiple versions of VS
> > files has been an annoying missing feature.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> > http://blogs.msdn.com/b/zainnab/archive/2012/06/05/visual-studio-2012-compatibility-aka-project-round-tripping.aspx
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Michael Herndon <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > I think it's usually the project files that are backwards compatible not
> > > the solution files. So you need a solution for each vs version but should
> > > be able to keep the proj files the same.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: Christopher Currens
> > > > Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM
> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > > >
> > > > Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had
> > > forgotten
> > > > about that.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to
> > date.
> > > > > Anything in trunk should be there
> > > > >
> > > > > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > From: Christopher Currens
> > > > > Sent: 8/8/2012 1:35 PM
> > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the feedback. Let us know if you run into any more
-
Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issuesChristopher Currens 2012-08-13, 20:07
Hmm, I ran into this last week and I specifically recall fixing it,
but sure enough, it is fails to build in both branches. I guess I
only fixed it in my private branch.
Ah well, it's fixed now. Thanks.
Christopher
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Granroth, Neal V.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for the updated VS2010 solution files.
> Lucene.Net.Core builds without a problem.
> Lucene.Net.Demo encounters 12 errors and will not build.
>
> All 12 are the same error and all are in IndexHtml.cs:
> Non-invocable member 'Lucene.Net.Index.TermEnum.Term' cannot be used like a method.
>
> An example is this statement, line 139:
> reader.DeleteDocuments(uidIter.Term());
>
> Term is apparently now a property, no longer a function.
>
>
> - Neal
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Prescott Nasser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2012 1:23 PM
> To: Lucene Developers; Lucene Users
> Subject: RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>
> Alright - I see Chris updated the 3.0.3 branch with the solution files and a quick fix for the NativeFSLockFactory. We've had some people downloading the pre-release packages (Lucene.Net.Contrib 11 times, Lucene.Net 23 times). Mostly all quiet regarding issues. Unless there are any issues outstanding, lets call it good, run RAT on the 3.0.3 branch to fix any issues about headers, update the changelog files to represent the changes in 3.0.3 from 2.9.4 ~P
>> Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 14:44:01 -0400
>> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> oooooooo, the nifty new vs feature find of the day goes to Mr. Currens.
>>
>> I've been using it for tons of JavaScript style development with requireJS,
>> kendo, my own set of scripts, and custom stuff for the day job. It actually
>> provides intellisense for JS inheritance so life is good.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Christopher Currens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > wrote:
>>
>> > It used to be that way. VS2012 is the first version that produces
>> > backwards compatible projects *and* solutions. There's an msdn blog
>> > entry[1] that discusses it. It does focus more projects, but starts with
>> > discussing solutions and how having it all backwards compatible would ease
>> > transitions for most companies. There are a few project types that aren't
>> > backwards compatible, but I think the solution will still open in both,
>> > with a notification that it can't load the project type.
>> >
>> > Excerpt: "In other words, we now have project round-tripping capability so
>> > you can work with the latest features but still keep the solution
>> > compatible with team members using an older version of Visual Studio."
>> >
>> > Anyway, it's about time they did this. Supporting multiple versions of VS
>> > files has been an annoying missing feature.
>> >
>> > [1]
>> >
>> > http://blogs.msdn.com/b/zainnab/archive/2012/06/05/visual-studio-2012-compatibility-aka-project-round-tripping.aspx
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Michael Herndon <
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> > > I think it's usually the project files that are backwards compatible not
>> > > the solution files. So you need a solution for each vs version but should
>> > > be able to keep the proj files the same.
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > >wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Yes
>> > > >
>> > > > Sent from my Windows Phone
>> > > > ________________________________
>> > > > From: Christopher Currens
>> > > > Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM
>> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>> > > >
>> > > > Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had
>> > > forgotten
>> > > > about that.
>> > > >
>> > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > > >wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to
but sure enough, it is fails to build in both branches. I guess I
only fixed it in my private branch.
Ah well, it's fixed now. Thanks.
Christopher
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Granroth, Neal V.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for the updated VS2010 solution files.
> Lucene.Net.Core builds without a problem.
> Lucene.Net.Demo encounters 12 errors and will not build.
>
> All 12 are the same error and all are in IndexHtml.cs:
> Non-invocable member 'Lucene.Net.Index.TermEnum.Term' cannot be used like a method.
>
> An example is this statement, line 139:
> reader.DeleteDocuments(uidIter.Term());
>
> Term is apparently now a property, no longer a function.
>
>
> - Neal
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Prescott Nasser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2012 1:23 PM
> To: Lucene Developers; Lucene Users
> Subject: RE: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>
> Alright - I see Chris updated the 3.0.3 branch with the solution files and a quick fix for the NativeFSLockFactory. We've had some people downloading the pre-release packages (Lucene.Net.Contrib 11 times, Lucene.Net 23 times). Mostly all quiet regarding issues. Unless there are any issues outstanding, lets call it good, run RAT on the 3.0.3 branch to fix any issues about headers, update the changelog files to represent the changes in 3.0.3 from 2.9.4 ~P
>> Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 14:44:01 -0400
>> Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> oooooooo, the nifty new vs feature find of the day goes to Mr. Currens.
>>
>> I've been using it for tons of JavaScript style development with requireJS,
>> kendo, my own set of scripts, and custom stuff for the day job. It actually
>> provides intellisense for JS inheritance so life is good.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Christopher Currens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > wrote:
>>
>> > It used to be that way. VS2012 is the first version that produces
>> > backwards compatible projects *and* solutions. There's an msdn blog
>> > entry[1] that discusses it. It does focus more projects, but starts with
>> > discussing solutions and how having it all backwards compatible would ease
>> > transitions for most companies. There are a few project types that aren't
>> > backwards compatible, but I think the solution will still open in both,
>> > with a notification that it can't load the project type.
>> >
>> > Excerpt: "In other words, we now have project round-tripping capability so
>> > you can work with the latest features but still keep the solution
>> > compatible with team members using an older version of Visual Studio."
>> >
>> > Anyway, it's about time they did this. Supporting multiple versions of VS
>> > files has been an annoying missing feature.
>> >
>> > [1]
>> >
>> > http://blogs.msdn.com/b/zainnab/archive/2012/06/05/visual-studio-2012-compatibility-aka-project-round-tripping.aspx
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Michael Herndon <
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> > > I think it's usually the project files that are backwards compatible not
>> > > the solution files. So you need a solution for each vs version but should
>> > > be able to keep the proj files the same.
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > >wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Yes
>> > > >
>> > > > Sent from my Windows Phone
>> > > > ________________________________
>> > > > From: Christopher Currens
>> > > > Sent: 8/8/2012 4:22 PM
>> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > > Subject: Re: Lucene.NET 3.0.3 Build issues
>> > > >
>> > > > Oh, did you do that so we'd have a branch to do bug fixes? I had
>> > > forgotten
>> > > > about that.
>> > > >
>> > > > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > > >wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > I just created 3.0.3 last weekend - it should be incredibly up to
