Thanks everyone, this vote has passed. A bit more contentious of a PMC vote than usual, but the committer vote was clear.
-Yonik On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:11 PM, Yonik Seeley <[email protected]> wrote: > Apoligies in advance for calling yet another vote, but I just wanted > to make sure this was official. > Mike's second VOTE thread could probably technically stand on it's own > (since it included PMC votes), but given that I said in my previous > VOTE thread that I was just polling Lucene/Solr committers and would > call a second PMC vote, that may have acted to suppress PMC votes on > Mike's thread also. > > Please vote for the proposal quoted below to merge lucene/solr development. > Here's my +1 > > -Yonik > > Mike's call for a VOTE (amongst lucene/solr committers +11 to -1): > http://search.lucidimagination.com/search/document/a400ffe62ae21aca/vote_merge_the_development_of_solr_lucene_take_2#22d7cd086d9c5cf0 >> Subject: Merge the development of Solr/Lucene (take 2) >> A new vote, that slightly changes proposal from last vote (adding only >> that Lucene can cut a release even if Solr doesn't): >> >> * Merging the dev lists into a single list. >> >> * Merging committers. >> >> * When any change is committed (to a module that "belongs to" Solr or >> to Lucene), all tests must pass. >> >> * Release details will be decided by dev community, but, Lucene may >> release without Solr. >> >> * Modulariize the sources: pull things out of Lucene's core (break >> out query parser, move all core queries & analyzers under their >> contrib counterparts), pull things out of Solr's core (analyzers, >> queries). >> >> These things would not change: >> >> * Besides modularizing (above), the source code would remain factored >> into separate dirs/modules the way it is now. >> >> * Issue tracking remains separate (SOLR-XXX and LUCENE-XXX >> issues). >> >> * User's lists remain separate. >> >> * Web sites remain separate. >> >> * Release artifacts/jars remain separate. >
