Hello everyone! I will pick up LUCENE-9908.

I had marked LUCENE-9583 as a blocker but I'm on board with removing its
blocker status given we can make changes later. I hope to come back to the
issue soon with some ideas.


Julie

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 12:42 PM Adrien Grand <[email protected]> wrote:

> I agree that we can remove the blocker status from LUCENE-9583 and take
> advantage of the fact that these new APIs are experimental to improve
> things later.
>
> For the renaming issue, maybe we could just make vectors plural for now
> for consistency and revisit other options later.
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 8:21 PM Michael Sokolov <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Adrien; I plan to tackle LUCENE-9905.
>>
>>  I don't have ideas about how to move forward on LUCENE-9583; I spent
>> significant amount of time trying various permutations on that API,
>> and what we have was the best compromise I could find at the time, so
>> I'm not sure I agree it's a Blocker, yet I'm open to improvements.
>> Maybe Julie will propose something?
>>
>> There is also a vector-related renaming issue Tomoko had opened, which
>> I thought was marked Blocker, but I guess no longer is. Previously I
>> had hoped to get some strong consensus, but that proved challenging.
>> Given that, I'm OK leaving things as-is, marking these apis
>> @experimental and potentially revisiting naming issues later, eg once
>> we have a second vector ANN implementation.
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:07 AM Adrien Grand <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Mike,
>> >
>> > Here's what I know about the remaining blockers:
>> >
>> > LUCENE-9908 - Move VectorValues#search to VectorReader and LeafReader
>> > This was discussed on the mailing list and it looks like there was
>> agreement on making that change. If someone has cycles and can take it,
>> please go ahead, otherwise I'll try to allocate some time to it. I'm
>> expecting this change to be rather straightforward.
>> >
>> > LUCENE-9905 - Revise approach to specifying NN algorithm
>> > This is a change to how we've been thinking about configuring the ANN
>> algorithm. I don't know if someone plans to work on it.
>> >
>> > LUCENE-9583 - How should we expose VectorValues.RandomAccess
>> > We'd like to get rid of this sub interface, but I'm not the best person
>> to comment on how much work this needs. Maybe Mike S or Julie can give more
>> info.
>> >
>> > LUCENE-9334 - Require consistency between data-structures on a
>> per-field basis
>> > Mayya has been working on this one and it's very close.
>> >
>> > LUCENE-9047 - Directory APIs should be little endian
>> > Ignacio and Julie have been working on this one and it is close as well.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 10:59 PM Mike Drob <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Michael, did you get a chance to mark the issues you were thinking of
>> as blockers?
>> >>
>> >> Adrien, I see that the remaining open blockers look mostly like your
>> open issues. Two of them have recent activity, but LUCENE-9047 would need
>> to be brought back to the lucene repo. Is this an accurate view of the
>> state of things?
>> >>
>> >> Now that I'm done with 8.8.2, I would love to see how we can continue
>> to make headway on 9.0!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 3:25 PM Michael Sokolov <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> There has been some discussion around a few code visibility and naming
>> >>> issues related to "VectorFormat" as it is called today. I'd like to
>> >>> get that sorted out before 9.0 - I'll hunt up the ticket(s) and mark
>> >>> as blockers
>> >>>
>> >>> On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 11:02 AM Adrien Grand <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Hello Jan,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > The list of blockers should be mostly up-to-date:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9661?jql=project%3D%22Lucene%20-%20Core%22%20and%20priority%3DBlocker%20and%20fixVersion%3D%22main%20(9.0)%22
>> .
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 7:21 PM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Hi,
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Where are we at with the Lucene 9.0 release planning?
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> The git split is largely done. Not sure about the build.
>> >>> >> Let's update the umbrella issue
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9375 for known remaining
>> cleanup tasks.
>> >>> >> The one on that list is releaseWizard, but as Adrien says there
>> are also other scripts that need updating.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Jan
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> 13. jan. 2021 kl. 15:10 skrev Adrien Grand <[email protected]>:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> +1 to start planning 9.0.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Since you mentioned the Gradle build, I believe that we still need
>> to migrate some of the release tooling from Ant to Gradle, e.g.
>> dev-tools/scripts/addBackcompatIndexes.py. These scripts are not easy to
>> test without actually doing a release so the 9.0 RM might have some
>> debugging to do.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 7:17 PM Michael Sokolov <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> Hi everyone, as we head into a new year full of optimism, is it
>> time
>> >>> >>> to start discussing the next major release? We released 8.0 on
>> Jun 18,
>> >>> >>> 2019, over 18 months ago. Since then we've switched to a
>> gradle-based
>> >>> >>> build. We have added vector-valued fields and an HNSW neighbor
>> search
>> >>> >>> algorithm for them.  At the same time Solr has been getting a
>> major
>> >>> >>> overhaul which should justify a release, I think? IIRC there was
>> talk
>> >>> >>> of making 9.0 be the first release of Solr as its own TLP. Is it
>> time
>> >>> >>> to start planning for that now?
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> -Mike
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >>> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> --
>> >>> >> Adrien
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > --
>> >>> > Adrien
>> >>>
>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >>>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Adrien
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>>
>
> --
> Adrien
>

Reply via email to