+1 and thanks to will for bringing this up. Single place (SolrIdentifierValidator) is best, we should've used it in package manager (i don't remember seeing something like that during the dev work of the package manager)
On Fri, 26 May 2023 at 23:10, Ishan Chattopadhyaya < ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote: > most likely oversight.. not intentional. > (sorry for terse replies, texting from a hospital amidst an emergency) > > On Fri, 26 May 2023 at 20:28, Jason Gerlowski <gerlowsk...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Will, >> >> I think the last thorough discussion around what names should be >> allowed happened in SOLR-8110 here: >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8110. >> >> A few other relevant tickets are: SOLR-8642, SOLR-8725, and 8677, but >> these mostly lean on the regex arrived at by SOLR-8110 (which allows >> '.'). >> >> I agree with Gus that we should tread carefully here, but IMO >> "widening" changes like what Will is suggesting should be do-able. As >> long as there's not a particular reason that Package Manager code went >> with a more restrictive regex, I think it makes sense to bring it into >> line with the behavior in SolrIdentifierValidator. >> >> @ishan, or @noble - I know you guys did most of the work on the >> package manager. Did you have a particular reason for disallowing '.' >> in collection names there? (Maybe something in the package manager >> relies on '.' as a delimiter?). Or was it an oversight? >> >> Best, >> >> Jason >> >> >> On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 9:06 AM Gus Heck <gus.h...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Collection naming discussions that I recall were probably more than 24 >> > months ago. One good strategy is git blame in the relevant code. That >> > should lead you to a commit hash and a commit message. The message would >> > mention the Jira ticket. The jira ticket would hopefully have >> discussion, >> > sometimes (rarely) with links to mail archives. >> > >> > Note however changing anything about collection naming rules is not >> small, >> > and discussing it here (with pointers to past discussions/tickets) is >> > certainly good. >> > >> > Once you have a patch and feel you have the background researched and a >> > list discussion supporting your change, opening a Jira ticket and >> creating >> > a PR are the way to go. >> > >> > -Gus >> > >> > On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 2:38 AM Will White <willdotwhit...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > > Hi all, >> > > >> > > There's an inconsistency in how Solr validates collection names >> between >> > > creating a collection through the Collection API >> > > (org.apache.solr.handler.admin.api.CreateCollectionAPI.java#L405, via >> the >> > > SolrIdentifierValidator) and through the Package Manager >> > > (org.apache.solr.packagemanager.PackageUtils.java#L271 with an inline >> > > regex). >> > > >> > > I'd like to update the Package Manager to use the more expansive >> > > identifierPattern (which allows for collections containing a '.' >> character, >> > > as our collections use semantic versioning as a naming convention), >> but I >> > > couldn't find any concrete details on what the supported naming >> convention >> > > was for Solr 9 nor any relevant discussion in the last 24 months in >> the >> > > email archive (lists.apache.org/list.html). >> > > >> > > Question 1: Is there anywhere this information exists (so I can do >> proper >> > > due diligence in future), and/or is a search through Slack/email >> archive >> > > generally sufficient to open a JIRA ticket? >> > > >> > > Question 2: Should a minor change like this be discussed in email or >> > > against an open PR? I'm still getting used to the Apache ways of >> working, >> > > apologies if I've missed the point on the email approach! >> > > >> > > Cheers, >> > > >> > > Will >> > > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work) >> > http://www.the111shift.com (play) >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@solr.apache.org >> >>
