All,

We'd like to update the project directory structure/layout.

See below for a proposed layout. I've also uploaded an example which
you can navigate at:

http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example

NOTE: This will not build!! I just put things in the appropriate
places without updating the solution/project files to show how we
might lay things out. Also, I included NUnit as an example of a
third-party dependency that we might include in the repository under
'lib'. We of course will *not* be distributing NUnit in this manner,
due to licensing restrictions.

Ok, disclaimer over...

Please vote on this layout, or suggest a modification or alternative layout.

Voting will be open for 72 hours.

[ ] +1 Use this directory structure exactly as described, or with a
minor modification
[ ] 0 Use a different structure (described in response)
[ ] -1 Do not change the directory structure at all
Text description of directory schema:

Build Files:

\build
\build\VS2008
\build\VS2010
Source Projects:

\src
\src\contrib
\src\core
\src\demo
\src\contrib\<project-name>
\src\core\<project-name>
\src\demo\<project-name>
Test Projects:

\test
\test\contrib
\test\core
\test\demo
\test\contrib\<project-name>
\test\core\<project-name>
\test\demo\<project-name>
Product Documentation:

\doc
\doc\contrib
\doc\core
\doc\demo
\doc\contrib\<project-name>
\doc\core\<project-name>
\doc\demo\<project-name>
Third-Party Dependencies:

\lib
\lib\<vendor>
\lib\<vendor>\<product>
\lib\<vendor>\<product>\<version>
Binary Builds:

\bin
\bin\contrib
\bin\core
\bin\demo
\bin\contrib\<project-name>
\bin\core\<project-name>
\bin\demo\<project-name>

+1

just a question though.  for cmd/bat//sh files for letting people executing
the build or just executing other tools from the command line, would those
have a place in /bin or somewhere els?  This is that someone can just export
PATH = / SET PATH=   to that one folder and then be able to execute those
commands from one location?

On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Troy Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> All,
>
> We'd like to update the project directory structure/layout.
>
> See below for a proposed layout. I've also uploaded an example which
> you can navigate at:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example
>
> NOTE: This will not build!! I just put things in the appropriate
> places without updating the solution/project files to show how we
> might lay things out. Also, I included NUnit as an example of a
> third-party dependency that we might include in the repository under
> 'lib'. We of course will *not* be distributing NUnit in this manner,
> due to licensing restrictions.
>
> Ok, disclaimer over...
>
> Please vote on this layout, or suggest a modification or alternative
> layout.
>
> Voting will be open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1 Use this directory structure exactly as described, or with a
> minor modification
> [ ] 0 Use a different structure (described in response)
> [ ] -1 Do not change the directory structure at all
>
>
> Text description of directory schema:
>
> Build Files:
>
> \build
> \build\VS2008
> \build\VS2010
>
>
> Source Projects:
>
> \src
> \src\contrib
> \src\core
> \src\demo
> \src\contrib\<project-name>
> \src\core\<project-name>
> \src\demo\<project-name>
>
>
> Test Projects:
>
> \test
> \test\contrib
> \test\core
> \test\demo
> \test\contrib\<project-name>
> \test\core\<project-name>
> \test\demo\<project-name>
>
>
> Product Documentation:
>
> \doc
> \doc\contrib
> \doc\core
> \doc\demo
> \doc\contrib\<project-name>
> \doc\core\<project-name>
> \doc\demo\<project-name>
>
>
> Third-Party Dependencies:
>
> \lib
> \lib\<vendor>
> \lib\<vendor>\<product>
> \lib\<vendor>\<product>\<version>
>
>
> Binary Builds:
>
> \bin
> \bin\contrib
> \bin\core
> \bin\demo
> \bin\contrib\<project-name>
> \bin\core\<project-name>
> \bin\demo\<project-name>
>

Probably just a miss - but under the src/contrib folder you also have a number of tests in there...
 
 
Also, is it necessary to have all the sub folders? For the most part the stuff in contrib.net is contrib.net - why the secondary folder? Unless that is a requirement of NUnit to have the structure that way it seems a bit cluttered.
 
I would think something like
 
src/contrib/contrib.net/
src/contrib/Snowball.net/
 
instead of
 
src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/
src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/

I don't know how people feel about that
~P
----------------------------------------
> Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 13:31:34 -0500
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
>
> +1
>
> just a question though. for cmd/bat//sh files for letting people executing
> the build or just executing other tools from the command line, would those
> have a place in /bin or somewhere els? This is that someone can just export
> PATH = / SET PATH= to that one folder and then be able to execute those
> commands from one location?
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Troy Howard wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > We'd like to update the project directory structure/layout.
> >
> > See below for a proposed layout. I've also uploaded an example which
> > you can navigate at:
> >
> > http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example
> >
> > NOTE: This will not build!! I just put things in the appropriate
> > places without updating the solution/project files to show how we
> > might lay things out. Also, I included NUnit as an example of a
> > third-party dependency that we might include in the repository under
> > 'lib'. We of course will *not* be distributing NUnit in this manner,
> > due to licensing restrictions.
> >
> > Ok, disclaimer over...
> >
> > Please vote on this layout, or suggest a modification or alternative
> > layout.
> >
> > Voting will be open for 72 hours.
> >
> > [ ] +1 Use this directory structure exactly as described, or with a
> > minor modification
> > [ ] 0 Use a different structure (described in response)
> > [ ] -1 Do not change the directory structure at all
> >
> >
> > Text description of directory schema:
> >
> > Build Files:
> >
> > \build
> > \build\VS2008
> > \build\VS2010
> >
> >
> > Source Projects:
> >
> > \src
> > \src\contrib
> > \src\core
> > \src\demo
> > \src\contrib\
> > \src\core\
> > \src\demo\
> >
> >
> > Test Projects:
> >
> > \test
> > \test\contrib
> > \test\core
> > \test\demo
> > \test\contrib\
> > \test\core\
> > \test\demo\
> >
> >
> > Product Documentation:
> >
> > \doc
> > \doc\contrib
> > \doc\core
> > \doc\demo
> > \doc\contrib\
> > \doc\core\
> > \doc\demo\
> >
> >
> > Third-Party Dependencies:
> >
> > \lib
> > \lib\
> > \lib\\
> > \lib\\\
> >
> >
> > Binary Builds:
> >
> > \bin
> > \bin\contrib
> > \bin\core
> > \bin\demo
> > \bin\contrib\
> > \bin\core\
> > \bin\demo\
> >    

0

".Net"s seem to be redundant under /src/contrib/ .  It could be something
like
Analyzers
Highlighter
Similarity
...

(Maybe, we should find  a different name for contrib.net. It contains
"contributions specific to Lucene.Net which are not available in
Lucene.java)

DIGY

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

>
> Probably just a miss - but under the src/contrib folder you also have a
> number of tests in there...
>
>
> Also, is it necessary to have all the sub folders? For the most part the
> stuff in contrib.net is contrib.net - why the secondary folder? Unless
> that is a requirement of NUnit to have the structure that way it seems a bit
> cluttered.
>
> I would think something like
>
> src/contrib/contrib.net/
> src/contrib/Snowball.net/
>
> instead of
>
> src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/
> src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/
>
> I don't know how people feel about that
>
>
> ~P
>
>
> ----------------------------------------
> > Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 13:31:34 -0500
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
> >
> > +1
> >
> > just a question though. for cmd/bat//sh files for letting people
> executing
> > the build or just executing other tools from the command line, would
> those
> > have a place in /bin or somewhere els? This is that someone can just
> export
> > PATH = / SET PATH= to that one folder and then be able to execute those
> > commands from one location?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Troy Howard wrote:
> >
> > > All,
> > >
> > > We'd like to update the project directory structure/layout.
> > >
> > > See below for a proposed layout. I've also uploaded an example which
> > > you can navigate at:
> > >
> > >
> http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example
> > >
> > > NOTE: This will not build!! I just put things in the appropriate
> > > places without updating the solution/project files to show how we
> > > might lay things out. Also, I included NUnit as an example of a
> > > third-party dependency that we might include in the repository under
> > > 'lib'. We of course will *not* be distributing NUnit in this manner,
> > > due to licensing restrictions.
> > >
> > > Ok, disclaimer over...
> > >
> > > Please vote on this layout, or suggest a modification or alternative
> > > layout.
> > >
> > > Voting will be open for 72 hours.
> > >
> > > [ ] +1 Use this directory structure exactly as described, or with a
> > > minor modification
> > > [ ] 0 Use a different structure (described in response)
> > > [ ] -1 Do not change the directory structure at all
> > >
> > >
> > > Text description of directory schema:
> > >
> > > Build Files:
> > >
> > > \build
> > > \build\VS2008
> > > \build\VS2010
> > >
> > >
> > > Source Projects:
> > >
> > > \src
> > > \src\contrib
> > > \src\core
> > > \src\demo
> > > \src\contrib\
> > > \src\core\
> > > \src\demo\
> > >
> > >
> > > Test Projects:
> > >
> > > \test
> > > \test\contrib
> > > \test\core
> > > \test\demo
> > > \test\contrib\
> > > \test\core\
> > > \test\demo\
> > >
> > >
> > > Product Documentation:
> > >
> > > \doc
> > > \doc\contrib
> > > \doc\core
> > > \doc\demo
> > > \doc\contrib\
> > > \doc\core\
> > > \doc\demo\
> > >
> > >
> > > Third-Party Dependencies:
> > >
> > > \lib
> > > \lib\
> > > \lib\\
> > > \lib\\\
> > >
> > >
> > > Binary Builds:
> > >
> > > \bin
> > > \bin\contrib
> > > \bin\core
> > > \bin\demo
> > > \bin\contrib\
> > > \bin\core\
> > > \bin\demo\
> > >

Actually what IS contrib.net? It looks like it replaces certain files in Lucene.Net core - are they files better suited to .net? What are they?
 
If they are plugins / additional contributions like snowball, etc - why not just break it out and include the appropriate stuff in contrib? Do we need to specify that they are not avaliable in the java version?

----------------------------------------
> Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:18:22 +0200
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
>
> 0
>
> ".Net"s seem to be redundant under /src/contrib/ . It could be something
> like
> Analyzers
> Highlighter
> Similarity
> ...
>
>
>
> (Maybe, we should find a different name for contrib.net. It contains
> "contributions specific to Lucene.Net which are not available in
> Lucene.java)
>
> DIGY
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote:
>
> >
> > Probably just a miss - but under the src/contrib folder you also have a
> > number of tests in there...
> >
> >
> > Also, is it necessary to have all the sub folders? For the most part the
> > stuff in contrib.net is contrib.net - why the secondary folder? Unless
> > that is a requirement of NUnit to have the structure that way it seems a bit
> > cluttered.
> >
> > I would think something like
> >
> > src/contrib/contrib.net/
> > src/contrib/Snowball.net/
> >
> > instead of
> >
> > src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/
> > src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/
> >
> > I don't know how people feel about that
> >
> >
> > ~P
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------
> > > Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 13:31:34 -0500
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > just a question though. for cmd/bat//sh files for letting people
> > executing
> > > the build or just executing other tools from the command line, would
> > those
> > > have a place in /bin or somewhere els? This is that someone can just
> > export
> > > PATH = / SET PATH= to that one folder and then be able to execute those
> > > commands from one location?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Troy Howard wrote:
> > >
> > > > All,
> > > >
> > > > We'd like to update the project directory structure/layout.
> > > >
> > > > See below for a proposed layout. I've also uploaded an example which
> > > > you can navigate at:
> > > >
> > > >
> > http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example
> > > >
> > > > NOTE: This will not build!! I just put things in the appropriate
> > > > places without updating the solution/project files to show how we
> > > > might lay things out. Also, I included NUnit as an example of a
> > > > third-party dependency that we might include in the repository under
> > > > 'lib'. We of course will *not* be distributing NUnit in this manner,
> > > > due to licensing restrictions.
> > > >
> > > > Ok, disclaimer over...
> > > >
> > > > Please vote on this layout, or suggest a modification or alternative
> > > > layout.
> > > >
> > > > Voting will be open for 72 hours.
> > > >
> > > > [ ] +1 Use this directory structure exactly as described, or with a
> > > > minor modification
> > > > [ ] 0 Use a different structure (described in response)
> > > > [ ] -1 Do not change the directory structure at all
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Text description of directory schema:
> > > >
> > > > Build Files:
> > > >
> > > > \build
> > > > \build\VS2008
> > > > \build\VS2010
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Source Projects:
> > > >
> > > > \src
> > > > \src\contrib
> > > > \src\core
> > > > \src\demo
> > > > \src\contrib\
> > > > \src\core\
> > > > \src\demo\
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Test Projects:
> > > >
> > > > \test
> > > > \test\contrib
> > > > \test\core
> > > > \test\demo
> > > > \test\contrib\
> > > > \test\core\
> > > > \test\demo\
> > > >
> > > >

I agree that the names are redundant. I definitely want to drop the
".Net" from the project names.

At some point I'd like to revise the namespaces in the same manner,
removing the superfluous '.Net' elements: Apache.Lucene.Core.xxx,
Apache.Lucene.Contrib.xxx, Apache.Lucene.Demo.xxx etc...

I also agree that there's no need for additional sub-directories under
the projects folders...

I've updated the example directory structure under contrib to remove
the test projects I accidentally left in there, remove the extra depth
of foldering, and remove the '.Net' designation from the folders.
Project files would be updated as well (but I didn't do that).

Michael: Regarding build scripts, those could go in ~/build directly,
or maybe make a subdir there ~/build/scripts ...

Thanks,
Troy
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:18 PM, digy digy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 0
>
> ".Net"s seem to be redundant under /src/contrib/ .  It could be something
> like
> Analyzers
> Highlighter
> Similarity
> ...
>
>
>
> (Maybe, we should find  a different name for contrib.net. It contains
> "contributions specific to Lucene.Net which are not available in
> Lucene.java)
>
> DIGY
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>>
>> Probably just a miss - but under the src/contrib folder you also have a
>> number of tests in there...
>>
>>
>> Also, is it necessary to have all the sub folders? For the most part the
>> stuff in contrib.net is contrib.net - why the secondary folder? Unless
>> that is a requirement of NUnit to have the structure that way it seems a bit
>> cluttered.
>>
>> I would think something like
>>
>> src/contrib/contrib.net/
>> src/contrib/Snowball.net/
>>
>> instead of
>>
>> src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/
>> src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/
>>
>> I don't know how people feel about that
>>
>>
>> ~P
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------
>> > Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 13:31:34 -0500
>> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
>> >
>> > +1
>> >
>> > just a question though. for cmd/bat//sh files for letting people
>> executing
>> > the build or just executing other tools from the command line, would
>> those
>> > have a place in /bin or somewhere els? This is that someone can just
>> export
>> > PATH = / SET PATH= to that one folder and then be able to execute those
>> > commands from one location?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Troy Howard wrote:
>> >
>> > > All,
>> > >
>> > > We'd like to update the project directory structure/layout.
>> > >
>> > > See below for a proposed layout. I've also uploaded an example which
>> > > you can navigate at:
>> > >
>> > >
>> http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example
>> > >
>> > > NOTE: This will not build!! I just put things in the appropriate
>> > > places without updating the solution/project files to show how we
>> > > might lay things out. Also, I included NUnit as an example of a
>> > > third-party dependency that we might include in the repository under
>> > > 'lib'. We of course will *not* be distributing NUnit in this manner,
>> > > due to licensing restrictions.
>> > >
>> > > Ok, disclaimer over...
>> > >
>> > > Please vote on this layout, or suggest a modification or alternative
>> > > layout.
>> > >
>> > > Voting will be open for 72 hours.
>> > >
>> > > [ ] +1 Use this directory structure exactly as described, or with a
>> > > minor modification
>> > > [ ] 0 Use a different structure (described in response)
>> > > [ ] -1 Do not change the directory structure at all
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Text description of directory schema:
>> > >
>> > > Build Files:
>> > >
>> > > \build
>> > > \build\VS2008
>> > > \build\VS2010
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Source Projects:
>> > >
>> > > \src
>> > > \src\contrib
>> > > \src\core
>> > > \src\demo
>> > > \src\contrib\
>> > > \src\core\

Yeah -- I also changed the Contrib.Net project folder name to
~/src/contrib/core ...

IMO we should just roll these into the main library if they are solid,
tested and useful.. This is keeping in line with our new philosophy
about allowing .NET specific changes, even if it means diverging from
Java Lucene to do it.

Thanks,
Troy
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Actually what IS contrib.net? It looks like it replaces certain files in Lucene.Net core - are they files better suited to .net? What are they?
>
> If they are plugins / additional contributions like snowball, etc - why not just break it out and include the appropriate stuff in contrib? Do we need to specify that they are not avaliable in the java version?
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------
>> Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:18:22 +0200
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
>>
>> 0
>>
>> ".Net"s seem to be redundant under /src/contrib/ . It could be something
>> like
>> Analyzers
>> Highlighter
>> Similarity
>> ...
>>
>>
>>
>> (Maybe, we should find a different name for contrib.net. It contains
>> "contributions specific to Lucene.Net which are not available in
>> Lucene.java)
>>
>> DIGY
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Probably just a miss - but under the src/contrib folder you also have a
>> > number of tests in there...
>> >
>> >
>> > Also, is it necessary to have all the sub folders? For the most part the
>> > stuff in contrib.net is contrib.net - why the secondary folder? Unless
>> > that is a requirement of NUnit to have the structure that way it seems a bit
>> > cluttered.
>> >
>> > I would think something like
>> >
>> > src/contrib/contrib.net/
>> > src/contrib/Snowball.net/
>> >
>> > instead of
>> >
>> > src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/
>> > src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/
>> >
>> > I don't know how people feel about that
>> >
>> >
>> > ~P
>> >
>> >
>> > ----------------------------------------
>> > > Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 13:31:34 -0500
>> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
>> > >
>> > > +1
>> > >
>> > > just a question though. for cmd/bat//sh files for letting people
>> > executing
>> > > the build or just executing other tools from the command line, would
>> > those
>> > > have a place in /bin or somewhere els? This is that someone can just
>> > export
>> > > PATH = / SET PATH= to that one folder and then be able to execute those
>> > > commands from one location?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Troy Howard wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > All,
>> > > >
>> > > > We'd like to update the project directory structure/layout.
>> > > >
>> > > > See below for a proposed layout. I've also uploaded an example which
>> > > > you can navigate at:
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example
>> > > >
>> > > > NOTE: This will not build!! I just put things in the appropriate
>> > > > places without updating the solution/project files to show how we
>> > > > might lay things out. Also, I included NUnit as an example of a
>> > > > third-party dependency that we might include in the repository under
>> > > > 'lib'. We of course will *not* be distributing NUnit in this manner,
>> > > > due to licensing restrictions.
>> > > >
>> > > > Ok, disclaimer over...
>> > > >
>> > > > Please vote on this layout, or suggest a modification or alternative
>> > > > layout.
>> > > >
>> > > > Voting will be open for 72 hours.
>> > > >
>> > > > [ ] +1 Use this directory structure exactly as described, or with a
>> > > > minor modification
>> > > > [ ] 0 Use a different structure (described in response)
>> > > > [ ] -1 Do not change the directory structure at all
>> > >

Well, not really "core".
Codes under Analyzer(by DIGY) can be moved to /src/contrib/analyzers (but
they are not ports from java).
The others(by M.GARSKI) are extensions to the core(something like
Lucene.Net.Core.Extensions)

DIGY
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Troy Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Yeah -- I also changed the Contrib.Net project folder name to
> ~/src/contrib/core ...
>
> IMO we should just roll these into the main library if they are solid,
> tested and useful.. This is keeping in line with our new philosophy
> about allowing .NET specific changes, even if it means diverging from
> Java Lucene to do it.
>
> Thanks,
> Troy
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Actually what IS contrib.net? It looks like it replaces certain files in
> Lucene.Net core - are they files better suited to .net? What are they?
> >
> > If they are plugins / additional contributions like snowball, etc - why
> not just break it out and include the appropriate stuff in contrib? Do we
> need to specify that they are not avaliable in the java version?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------
> >> Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:18:22 +0200
> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
> >>
> >> 0
> >>
> >> ".Net"s seem to be redundant under /src/contrib/ . It could be something
> >> like
> >> Analyzers
> >> Highlighter
> >> Similarity
> >> ...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> (Maybe, we should find a different name for contrib.net. It contains
> >> "contributions specific to Lucene.Net which are not available in
> >> Lucene.java)
> >>
> >> DIGY
> >>
> >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Probably just a miss - but under the src/contrib folder you also have
> a
> >> > number of tests in there...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Also, is it necessary to have all the sub folders? For the most part
> the
> >> > stuff in contrib.net is contrib.net - why the secondary folder?
> Unless
> >> > that is a requirement of NUnit to have the structure that way it seems
> a bit
> >> > cluttered.
> >> >
> >> > I would think something like
> >> >
> >> > src/contrib/contrib.net/
> >> > src/contrib/Snowball.net/
> >> >
> >> > instead of
> >> >
> >> > src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/
> >> > src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/
> >> >
> >> > I don't know how people feel about that
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ~P
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ----------------------------------------
> >> > > Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 13:31:34 -0500
> >> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> > > CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> > > Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
> >> > >
> >> > > +1
> >> > >
> >> > > just a question though. for cmd/bat//sh files for letting people
> >> > executing
> >> > > the build or just executing other tools from the command line, would
> >> > those
> >> > > have a place in /bin or somewhere els? This is that someone can just
> >> > export
> >> > > PATH = / SET PATH= to that one folder and then be able to execute
> those
> >> > > commands from one location?
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Troy Howard wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > All,
> >> > > >
> >> > > > We'd like to update the project directory structure/layout.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > See below for a proposed layout. I've also uploaded an example
> which
> >> > > > you can navigate at:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> >
> http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example
> >> > > >
> >> > > > NOTE: This will not build!! I just put things in the appropriate
> >> > > > places without updating the solution/project files to show how we
> >> > > > might lay things out. Also, I included NUnit as an example of a
> >> > > > third-party dependency that we might include in the repository
> under
> >> > > > 'lib'. We of course will *not* be distributing NUnit in this

Any more thoughts on the directory structure?
 
Quick Recap:

We have Troy's original proposal here: http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example/
 
bin/
build/   (various solution and project files)
     vs2008/
     vs2010/
doc/
lib/ - third party libraries to make it easy to pull down the source and go
src/
    contrib/
    core/
    demo/
test/
    contrib/
    core/
    demo/
 
>From here, I further suggested cleaning up the contrib folder - because we have extra folders:
 
src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/ -> src/contrib/contrib.net/
src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/ -> src/contrib/Snowball.net/
 
Digy further suggested dropping the .net in all those folders above, and finding a better name for contrib.net.
 
 
 
----------------------------------------
> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:41:17 +0200
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
>
> Well, not really "core".
> Codes under Analyzer(by DIGY) can be moved to /src/contrib/analyzers (but
> they are not ports from java).
> The others(by M.GARSKI) are extensions to the core(something like
> Lucene.Net.Core.Extensions)
>
> DIGY
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Troy Howard wrote:
>
> > Yeah -- I also changed the Contrib.Net project folder name to
> > ~/src/contrib/core ...
> >
> > IMO we should just roll these into the main library if they are solid,
> > tested and useful.. This is keeping in line with our new philosophy
> > about allowing .NET specific changes, even if it means diverging from
> > Java Lucene to do it.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Troy
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Prescott Nasser
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Actually what IS contrib.net? It looks like it replaces certain files in
> > Lucene.Net core - are they files better suited to .net? What are they?
> > >
> > > If they are plugins / additional contributions like snowball, etc - why
> > not just break it out and include the appropriate stuff in contrib? Do we
> > need to specify that they are not avaliable in the java version?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------
> > >> Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:18:22 +0200
> > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
> > >>
> > >> 0
> > >>
> > >> ".Net"s seem to be redundant under /src/contrib/ . It could be something
> > >> like
> > >> Analyzers
> > >> Highlighter
> > >> Similarity
> > >> ...
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> (Maybe, we should find a different name for contrib.net. It contains
> > >> "contributions specific to Lucene.Net which are not available in
> > >> Lucene.java)
> > >>
> > >> DIGY
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> > Probably just a miss - but under the src/contrib folder you also have
> > a
> > >> > number of tests in there...
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Also, is it necessary to have all the sub folders? For the most part
> > the
> > >> > stuff in contrib.net is contrib.net - why the secondary folder?
> > Unless
> > >> > that is a requirement of NUnit to have the structure that way it seems
> > a bit
> > >> > cluttered.
> > >> >
> > >> > I would think something like
> > >> >
> > >> > src/contrib/contrib.net/
> > >> > src/contrib/Snowball.net/
> > >> >
> > >> > instead of
> > >> >
> > >> > src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/
> > >> > src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/
> > >> >
> > >> > I don't know how people feel about that
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > ~P
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > ----------------------------------------
> > >> > > Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 13:31:34 -0500
> > >> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> > > CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> > > Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
> > >> > >
> > >> > > +1
> > >> > >
> > >> > > just a question though. for cmd/bat//sh files for letting people

formatting got screwed when sending..

>
> Any more thoughts on the directory structure?
>
> Quick Recap:
>
> We have Troy's original proposal here: http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example/
>
> bin/
> build/ (various solution and project files)
>  ----vs2008/
>  ----vs2010/
> doc/
> lib/ - third party libraries to make it easy to pull down the source and go
> src/
>  ----contrib/
>  ----core/
> ----demo/
> test/
> ----contrib/
> ----core/
> ----demo/
>
> From here, I further suggested cleaning up the contrib folder - because we have extra folders:
>
> src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/ -> src/contrib/contrib.net/
> src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/ -> src/contrib/Snowball.net/
>
> Digy further suggested dropping the .net in all those folders above, and finding a better name for contrib.net.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------
> > Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:41:17 +0200
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
> >
> > Well, not really "core".
> > Codes under Analyzer(by DIGY) can be moved to /src/contrib/analyzers (but
> > they are not ports from java).
> > The others(by M.GARSKI) are extensions to the core(something like
> > Lucene.Net.Core.Extensions)
> >
> > DIGY
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Troy Howard wrote:
> >
> > > Yeah -- I also changed the Contrib.Net project folder name to
> > > ~/src/contrib/core ...
> > >
> > > IMO we should just roll these into the main library if they are solid,
> > > tested and useful.. This is keeping in line with our new philosophy
> > > about allowing .NET specific changes, even if it means diverging from
> > > Java Lucene to do it.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Troy
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Prescott Nasser
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Actually what IS contrib.net? It looks like it replaces certain files in
> > > Lucene.Net core - are they files better suited to .net? What are they?
> > > >
> > > > If they are plugins / additional contributions like snowball, etc - why
> > > not just break it out and include the appropriate stuff in contrib? Do we
> > > need to specify that they are not avaliable in the java version?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----------------------------------------
> > > >> Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:18:22 +0200
> > > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
> > > >>
> > > >> 0
> > > >>
> > > >> ".Net"s seem to be redundant under /src/contrib/ . It could be something
> > > >> like
> > > >> Analyzers
> > > >> Highlighter
> > > >> Similarity
> > > >> ...
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> (Maybe, we should find a different name for contrib.net. It contains
> > > >> "contributions specific to Lucene.Net which are not available in
> > > >> Lucene.java)
> > > >>
> > > >> DIGY
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Probably just a miss - but under the src/contrib folder you also have
> > > a
> > > >> > number of tests in there...
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Also, is it necessary to have all the sub folders? For the most part
> > > the
> > > >> > stuff in contrib.net is contrib.net - why the secondary folder?
> > > Unless
> > > >> > that is a requirement of NUnit to have the structure that way it seems
> > > a bit
> > > >> > cluttered.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I would think something like
> > > >> >
> > > >> > src/contrib/contrib.net/
> > > >> > src/contrib/Snowball.net/
> > > >> >
> > > >> > instead of
> > > >> >
> > > >> > src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/
> > > >> > src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I don't know how people feel about that
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > ~P
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > ----------------------------------------
> > > >> > > Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 13:31:34 -0500

Looks like we have a 'lazy consensus', in that, no one has raised any
significant objections, a few minor modifications have been suggested
(which sound totally reasonable), and those who did vote were
positive.

Barring any objections, this vote passes.

Since DIGY and Scott seem to have gotten the bulk of the work on 2.9.4
finished, I think now is a good time to start the directory layout
changes, and it won't be too intrusive to any active commits. I'll
start on that this week.

If you have any pending commits that would be totally screwed up by
this directory change, please finalize those as soon as possible!
Otherwise I'll be moving things around and your patches/commits might
not be able to find the appropriate files.

Thanks,
Troy
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Any more thoughts on the directory structure?
>
> Quick Recap:
>
> We have Troy's original proposal here: http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example/
>
> bin/
> build/   (various solution and project files)
>     vs2008/
>     vs2010/
> doc/
> lib/ - third party libraries to make it easy to pull down the source and go
> src/
>    contrib/
>    core/
>    demo/
> test/
>    contrib/
>    core/
>    demo/
>
> From here, I further suggested cleaning up the contrib folder - because we have extra folders:
>
> src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/ -> src/contrib/contrib.net/
> src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/ -> src/contrib/Snowball.net/
>
> Digy further suggested dropping the .net in all those folders above, and finding a better name for contrib.net.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------
>> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:41:17 +0200
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
>>
>> Well, not really "core".
>> Codes under Analyzer(by DIGY) can be moved to /src/contrib/analyzers (but
>> they are not ports from java).
>> The others(by M.GARSKI) are extensions to the core(something like
>> Lucene.Net.Core.Extensions)
>>
>> DIGY
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Troy Howard wrote:
>>
>> > Yeah -- I also changed the Contrib.Net project folder name to
>> > ~/src/contrib/core ...
>> >
>> > IMO we should just roll these into the main library if they are solid,
>> > tested and useful.. This is keeping in line with our new philosophy
>> > about allowing .NET specific changes, even if it means diverging from
>> > Java Lucene to do it.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Troy
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Prescott Nasser
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Actually what IS contrib.net? It looks like it replaces certain files in
>> > Lucene.Net core - are they files better suited to .net? What are they?
>> > >
>> > > If they are plugins / additional contributions like snowball, etc - why
>> > not just break it out and include the appropriate stuff in contrib? Do we
>> > need to specify that they are not avaliable in the java version?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > ----------------------------------------
>> > >> Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:18:22 +0200
>> > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > >> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
>> > >>
>> > >> 0
>> > >>
>> > >> ".Net"s seem to be redundant under /src/contrib/ . It could be something
>> > >> like
>> > >> Analyzers
>> > >> Highlighter
>> > >> Similarity
>> > >> ...
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> (Maybe, we should find a different name for contrib.net. It contains
>> > >> "contributions specific to Lucene.Net which are not available in
>> > >> Lucene.java)
>> > >>
>> > >> DIGY
>> > >>
>> > >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Probably just a miss - but under the src/contrib folder you also have
>> > a
>> > >> > number of tests in there...
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Also, is it necessary to have all the sub folders? For the most part

+1.  No pending commits.
A copy of the current trunk somewhere else(tag, branches etc.) would be good
too.

DIGY.

On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Troy Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Looks like we have a 'lazy consensus', in that, no one has raised any
> significant objections, a few minor modifications have been suggested
> (which sound totally reasonable), and those who did vote were
> positive.
>
> Barring any objections, this vote passes.
>
> Since DIGY and Scott seem to have gotten the bulk of the work on 2.9.4
> finished, I think now is a good time to start the directory layout
> changes, and it won't be too intrusive to any active commits. I'll
> start on that this week.
>
> If you have any pending commits that would be totally screwed up by
> this directory change, please finalize those as soon as possible!
> Otherwise I'll be moving things around and your patches/commits might
> not be able to find the appropriate files.
>
> Thanks,
> Troy
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Any more thoughts on the directory structure?
> >
> > Quick Recap:
> >
> > We have Troy's original proposal here:
> http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example/
> >
> > bin/
> > build/   (various solution and project files)
> >     vs2008/
> >     vs2010/
> > doc/
> > lib/ - third party libraries to make it easy to pull down the source and
> go
> > src/
> >    contrib/
> >    core/
> >    demo/
> > test/
> >    contrib/
> >    core/
> >    demo/
> >
> > From here, I further suggested cleaning up the contrib folder - because
> we have extra folders:
> >
> > src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/ -> src/contrib/contrib.net/
> > src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/ -> src/contrib/Snowball.net/
> >
> > Digy further suggested dropping the .net in all those folders above, and
> finding a better name for contrib.net.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------
> >> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:41:17 +0200
> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
> >>
> >> Well, not really "core".
> >> Codes under Analyzer(by DIGY) can be moved to /src/contrib/analyzers
> (but
> >> they are not ports from java).
> >> The others(by M.GARSKI) are extensions to the core(something like
> >> Lucene.Net.Core.Extensions)
> >>
> >> DIGY
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Troy Howard wrote:
> >>
> >> > Yeah -- I also changed the Contrib.Net project folder name to
> >> > ~/src/contrib/core ...
> >> >
> >> > IMO we should just roll these into the main library if they are solid,
> >> > tested and useful.. This is keeping in line with our new philosophy
> >> > about allowing .NET specific changes, even if it means diverging from
> >> > Java Lucene to do it.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Troy
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Prescott Nasser
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Actually what IS contrib.net? It looks like it replaces certain
> files in
> >> > Lucene.Net core - are they files better suited to .net? What are they?
> >> > >
> >> > > If they are plugins / additional contributions like snowball, etc -
> why
> >> > not just break it out and include the appropriate stuff in contrib? Do
> we
> >> > need to specify that they are not avaliable in the java version?
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > ----------------------------------------
> >> > >> Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:18:22 +0200
> >> > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> > >> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
> >> > >>
> >> > >> 0
> >> > >>
> >> > >> ".Net"s seem to be redundant under /src/contrib/ . It could be
> something
> >> > >> like
> >> > >> Analyzers
> >> > >> Highlighter
> >> > >> Similarity
> >> > >> ...
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> (Maybe, we should find a different name for contrib.net. It

Sounds good. I'll make a tag prior to starting the directory changes,
but I'll commit changes to trunk.

Thanks,
Troy
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 11:55 AM, digy digy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1.  No pending commits.
> A copy of the current trunk somewhere else(tag, branches etc.) would be good
> too.
>
> DIGY.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Troy Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Looks like we have a 'lazy consensus', in that, no one has raised any
>> significant objections, a few minor modifications have been suggested
>> (which sound totally reasonable), and those who did vote were
>> positive.
>>
>> Barring any objections, this vote passes.
>>
>> Since DIGY and Scott seem to have gotten the bulk of the work on 2.9.4
>> finished, I think now is a good time to start the directory layout
>> changes, and it won't be too intrusive to any active commits. I'll
>> start on that this week.
>>
>> If you have any pending commits that would be totally screwed up by
>> this directory change, please finalize those as soon as possible!
>> Otherwise I'll be moving things around and your patches/commits might
>> not be able to find the appropriate files.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Troy
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Prescott Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Any more thoughts on the directory structure?
>> >
>> > Quick Recap:
>> >
>> > We have Troy's original proposal here:
>> http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example/
>> >
>> > bin/
>> > build/   (various solution and project files)
>> >     vs2008/
>> >     vs2010/
>> > doc/
>> > lib/ - third party libraries to make it easy to pull down the source and
>> go
>> > src/
>> >    contrib/
>> >    core/
>> >    demo/
>> > test/
>> >    contrib/
>> >    core/
>> >    demo/
>> >
>> > From here, I further suggested cleaning up the contrib folder - because
>> we have extra folders:
>> >
>> > src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/ -> src/contrib/contrib.net/
>> > src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/ -> src/contrib/Snowball.net/
>> >
>> > Digy further suggested dropping the .net in all those folders above, and
>> finding a better name for contrib.net.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ----------------------------------------
>> >> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:41:17 +0200
>> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
>> >>
>> >> Well, not really "core".
>> >> Codes under Analyzer(by DIGY) can be moved to /src/contrib/analyzers
>> (but
>> >> they are not ports from java).
>> >> The others(by M.GARSKI) are extensions to the core(something like
>> >> Lucene.Net.Core.Extensions)
>> >>
>> >> DIGY
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Troy Howard wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Yeah -- I also changed the Contrib.Net project folder name to
>> >> > ~/src/contrib/core ...
>> >> >
>> >> > IMO we should just roll these into the main library if they are solid,
>> >> > tested and useful.. This is keeping in line with our new philosophy
>> >> > about allowing .NET specific changes, even if it means diverging from
>> >> > Java Lucene to do it.
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks,
>> >> > Troy
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Prescott Nasser
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Actually what IS contrib.net? It looks like it replaces certain
>> files in
>> >> > Lucene.Net core - are they files better suited to .net? What are they?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > If they are plugins / additional contributions like snowball, etc -
>> why
>> >> > not just break it out and include the appropriate stuff in contrib? Do
>> we
>> >> > need to specify that they are not avaliable in the java version?
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > ----------------------------------------
>> >> > >> Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:18:22 +0200
>> >> > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> > >> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project

could you give a shout to the list when that gets stabilized?

On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Troy Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Sounds good. I'll make a tag prior to starting the directory changes,
> but I'll commit changes to trunk.
>
> Thanks,
> Troy
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 11:55 AM, digy digy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > +1.  No pending commits.
> > A copy of the current trunk somewhere else(tag, branches etc.) would be
> good
> > too.
> >
> > DIGY.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Troy Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Looks like we have a 'lazy consensus', in that, no one has raised any
> >> significant objections, a few minor modifications have been suggested
> >> (which sound totally reasonable), and those who did vote were
> >> positive.
> >>
> >> Barring any objections, this vote passes.
> >>
> >> Since DIGY and Scott seem to have gotten the bulk of the work on 2.9.4
> >> finished, I think now is a good time to start the directory layout
> >> changes, and it won't be too intrusive to any active commits. I'll
> >> start on that this week.
> >>
> >> If you have any pending commits that would be totally screwed up by
> >> this directory change, please finalize those as soon as possible!
> >> Otherwise I'll be moving things around and your patches/commits might
> >> not be able to find the appropriate files.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Troy
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Prescott Nasser <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Any more thoughts on the directory structure?
> >> >
> >> > Quick Recap:
> >> >
> >> > We have Troy's original proposal here:
> >>
> http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example/
> >> >
> >> > bin/
> >> > build/   (various solution and project files)
> >> >     vs2008/
> >> >     vs2010/
> >> > doc/
> >> > lib/ - third party libraries to make it easy to pull down the source
> and
> >> go
> >> > src/
> >> >    contrib/
> >> >    core/
> >> >    demo/
> >> > test/
> >> >    contrib/
> >> >    core/
> >> >    demo/
> >> >
> >> > From here, I further suggested cleaning up the contrib folder -
> because
> >> we have extra folders:
> >> >
> >> > src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/ -> src/contrib/contrib.net/
> >> > src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/ -> src/contrib/Snowball.net/
> >> >
> >> > Digy further suggested dropping the .net in all those folders above,
> and
> >> finding a better name for contrib.net.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ----------------------------------------
> >> >> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:41:17 +0200
> >> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> >> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
> >> >>
> >> >> Well, not really "core".
> >> >> Codes under Analyzer(by DIGY) can be moved to /src/contrib/analyzers
> >> (but
> >> >> they are not ports from java).
> >> >> The others(by M.GARSKI) are extensions to the core(something like
> >> >> Lucene.Net.Core.Extensions)
> >> >>
> >> >> DIGY
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Troy Howard wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Yeah -- I also changed the Contrib.Net project folder name to
> >> >> > ~/src/contrib/core ...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > IMO we should just roll these into the main library if they are
> solid,
> >> >> > tested and useful.. This is keeping in line with our new philosophy
> >> >> > about allowing .NET specific changes, even if it means diverging
> from
> >> >> > Java Lucene to do it.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Thanks,
> >> >> > Troy
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Prescott Nasser
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Actually what IS contrib.net? It looks like it replaces certain
> >> files in
> >> >> > Lucene.Net core - are they files better suited to .net? What are
> they?
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > If they are plugins / additional contributions like snowball, etc
> -
> >> why
> >> >> > not just break it out and include the appropriate stuff in contrib?

After this directory layout changes; what about replacing ArrayLists,
Hashtables etc, with appropriate Generics?  This would bring us very close
to lucene 3.0.3 (and not hard to do with the help of VS).

DIGY

On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:02 PM, Troy Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Sounds good. I'll make a tag prior to starting the directory changes,
> but I'll commit changes to trunk.
>
> Thanks,
> Troy
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 11:55 AM, digy digy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > +1.  No pending commits.
> > A copy of the current trunk somewhere else(tag, branches etc.) would be
> good
> > too.
> >
> > DIGY.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Troy Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Looks like we have a 'lazy consensus', in that, no one has raised any
> >> significant objections, a few minor modifications have been suggested
> >> (which sound totally reasonable), and those who did vote were
> >> positive.
> >>
> >> Barring any objections, this vote passes.
> >>
> >> Since DIGY and Scott seem to have gotten the bulk of the work on 2.9.4
> >> finished, I think now is a good time to start the directory layout
> >> changes, and it won't be too intrusive to any active commits. I'll
> >> start on that this week.
> >>
> >> If you have any pending commits that would be totally screwed up by
> >> this directory change, please finalize those as soon as possible!
> >> Otherwise I'll be moving things around and your patches/commits might
> >> not be able to find the appropriate files.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Troy
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Prescott Nasser <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Any more thoughts on the directory structure?
> >> >
> >> > Quick Recap:
> >> >
> >> > We have Troy's original proposal here:
> >>
> http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example/
> >> >
> >> > bin/
> >> > build/   (various solution and project files)
> >> >     vs2008/
> >> >     vs2010/
> >> > doc/
> >> > lib/ - third party libraries to make it easy to pull down the source
> and
> >> go
> >> > src/
> >> >    contrib/
> >> >    core/
> >> >    demo/
> >> > test/
> >> >    contrib/
> >> >    core/
> >> >    demo/
> >> >
> >> > From here, I further suggested cleaning up the contrib folder -
> because
> >> we have extra folders:
> >> >
> >> > src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/ -> src/contrib/contrib.net/
> >> > src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/ -> src/contrib/Snowball.net/
> >> >
> >> > Digy further suggested dropping the .net in all those folders above,
> and
> >> finding a better name for contrib.net.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ----------------------------------------
> >> >> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:41:17 +0200
> >> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> >> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
> >> >>
> >> >> Well, not really "core".
> >> >> Codes under Analyzer(by DIGY) can be moved to /src/contrib/analyzers
> >> (but
> >> >> they are not ports from java).
> >> >> The others(by M.GARSKI) are extensions to the core(something like
> >> >> Lucene.Net.Core.Extensions)
> >> >>
> >> >> DIGY
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Troy Howard wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Yeah -- I also changed the Contrib.Net project folder name to
> >> >> > ~/src/contrib/core ...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > IMO we should just roll these into the main library if they are
> solid,
> >> >> > tested and useful.. This is keeping in line with our new philosophy
> >> >> > about allowing .NET specific changes, even if it means diverging
> from
> >> >> > Java Lucene to do it.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Thanks,
> >> >> > Troy
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Prescott Nasser
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Actually what IS contrib.net? It looks like it replaces certain
> >> files in
> >> >> > Lucene.Net core - are they files better suited to .net? What are

Sounds good to me. I have done this previously in a local branch and
noticed massive performance improvements. Removing all the casting in
the library makes for dramatic speedups.

As a side note: Chris Currens is in the process of benchmarking
Lucene.Net running under .NET 4.0 vs 3.5 vs 2.0... This benchmarking
is to prove what we found in our production deployments... Compiling
and deploying as a .NET 4.0 assembly results in major improvements in
both speed and correct memory handling (memory leaks magically
disappear). We want to prove this with benchmarks before publishing a
definitive statement about this however.

If this is the case, there might be a very compelling reason to move
forward to 4.0 runtime for Lucene.Net.

Thanks,
Troy
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 12:23 PM, digy digy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> After this directory layout changes; what about replacing ArrayLists,
> Hashtables etc, with appropriate Generics?  This would bring us very close
> to lucene 3.0.3 (and not hard to do with the help of VS).
>
> DIGY
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:02 PM, Troy Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Sounds good. I'll make a tag prior to starting the directory changes,
>> but I'll commit changes to trunk.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Troy
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 11:55 AM, digy digy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > +1.  No pending commits.
>> > A copy of the current trunk somewhere else(tag, branches etc.) would be
>> good
>> > too.
>> >
>> > DIGY.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Troy Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Looks like we have a 'lazy consensus', in that, no one has raised any
>> >> significant objections, a few minor modifications have been suggested
>> >> (which sound totally reasonable), and those who did vote were
>> >> positive.
>> >>
>> >> Barring any objections, this vote passes.
>> >>
>> >> Since DIGY and Scott seem to have gotten the bulk of the work on 2.9.4
>> >> finished, I think now is a good time to start the directory layout
>> >> changes, and it won't be too intrusive to any active commits. I'll
>> >> start on that this week.
>> >>
>> >> If you have any pending commits that would be totally screwed up by
>> >> this directory change, please finalize those as soon as possible!
>> >> Otherwise I'll be moving things around and your patches/commits might
>> >> not be able to find the appropriate files.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Troy
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Prescott Nasser <
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Any more thoughts on the directory structure?
>> >> >
>> >> > Quick Recap:
>> >> >
>> >> > We have Troy's original proposal here:
>> >>
>> http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example/
>> >> >
>> >> > bin/
>> >> > build/   (various solution and project files)
>> >> >     vs2008/
>> >> >     vs2010/
>> >> > doc/
>> >> > lib/ - third party libraries to make it easy to pull down the source
>> and
>> >> go
>> >> > src/
>> >> >    contrib/
>> >> >    core/
>> >> >    demo/
>> >> > test/
>> >> >    contrib/
>> >> >    core/
>> >> >    demo/
>> >> >
>> >> > From here, I further suggested cleaning up the contrib folder -
>> because
>> >> we have extra folders:
>> >> >
>> >> > src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/ -> src/contrib/contrib.net/
>> >> > src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/ -> src/contrib/Snowball.net/
>> >> >
>> >> > Digy further suggested dropping the .net in all those folders above,
>> and
>> >> finding a better name for contrib.net.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > ----------------------------------------
>> >> >> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:41:17 +0200
>> >> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] [VOTE] New Directory Layout for Project
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Well, not really "core".
>> >> >> Codes under Analyzer(by DIGY) can be moved to /src/contrib/analyzers
>> >> (but
>> >

We already have a release for .NET 2.0 (Lucene.Net 2.9.2).  So, jumping to
4.0 shouldn't  be a problem for Lucene,Net community.
DIGY

On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:31 PM, Troy Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Sounds good to me. I have done this previously in a local branch and
> noticed massive performance improvements. Removing all the casting in
> the library makes for dramatic speedups.
>
> As a side note: Chris Currens is in the process of benchmarking
> Lucene.Net running under .NET 4.0 vs 3.5 vs 2.0... This benchmarking
> is to prove what we found in our production deployments... Compiling
> and deploying as a .NET 4.0 assembly results in major improvements in
> both speed and correct memory handling (memory leaks magically
> disappear). We want to prove this with benchmarks before publishing a
> definitive statement about this however.
>
> If this is the case, there might be a very compelling reason to move
> forward to 4.0 runtime for Lucene.Net.
>
> Thanks,
> Troy
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 12:23 PM, digy digy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > After this directory layout changes; what about replacing ArrayLists,
> > Hashtables etc, with appropriate Generics?  This would bring us very
> close
> > to lucene 3.0.3 (and not hard to do with the help of VS).
> >
> > DIGY
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:02 PM, Troy Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Sounds good. I'll make a tag prior to starting the directory changes,
> >> but I'll commit changes to trunk.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Troy
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 11:55 AM, digy digy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > +1.  No pending commits.
> >> > A copy of the current trunk somewhere else(tag, branches etc.) would
> be
> >> good
> >> > too.
> >> >
> >> > DIGY.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Troy Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Looks like we have a 'lazy consensus', in that, no one has raised any
> >> >> significant objections, a few minor modifications have been suggested
> >> >> (which sound totally reasonable), and those who did vote were
> >> >> positive.
> >> >>
> >> >> Barring any objections, this vote passes.
> >> >>
> >> >> Since DIGY and Scott seem to have gotten the bulk of the work on
> 2.9.4
> >> >> finished, I think now is a good time to start the directory layout
> >> >> changes, and it won't be too intrusive to any active commits. I'll
> >> >> start on that this week.
> >> >>
> >> >> If you have any pending commits that would be totally screwed up by
> >> >> this directory change, please finalize those as soon as possible!
> >> >> Otherwise I'll be moving things around and your patches/commits might
> >> >> not be able to find the appropriate files.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Troy
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Prescott Nasser <
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Any more thoughts on the directory structure?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Quick Recap:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > We have Troy's original proposal here:
> >> >>
> >>
> http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/directory-structure-example/
> >> >> >
> >> >> > bin/
> >> >> > build/   (various solution and project files)
> >> >> >     vs2008/
> >> >> >     vs2010/
> >> >> > doc/
> >> >> > lib/ - third party libraries to make it easy to pull down the
> source
> >> and
> >> >> go
> >> >> > src/
> >> >> >    contrib/
> >> >> >    core/
> >> >> >    demo/
> >> >> > test/
> >> >> >    contrib/
> >> >> >    core/
> >> >> >    demo/
> >> >> >
> >> >> > From here, I further suggested cleaning up the contrib folder -
> >> because
> >> >> we have extra folders:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > src/contrib/contrib.net/contrib.net/ -> src/contrib/contrib.net/
> >> >> > src/contrib/snowball/snowball.net/ -> src/contrib/Snowball.net/
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Digy further suggested dropping the .net in all those folders
> above,
> >> and
> >> >> finding a better name for contrib.net.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >