Re: [DISCUSS] Standardizing module naming

I agree that standardizing the names would be nice. Another good option is to have a ref-guide page that lists all the modules, explains their purpose and links to relevant documentation. This page could be broken down by feature, much like your proposed names would be. On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 1:

Re: [DISCUSS] Standardizing module naming

+1 I like your proposed names. Some of our names are so short now that only us know what they are at a glance. ~ David Smiley Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 11:01 AM Jan Høydahl wrote: > There is kind of a proposal in > htt

Re: [DISCUSS] Standardizing module naming

> Or we could just leave it up to each module author as before :) +1 On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 9:31 PM Jan Høydahl wrote: > There is kind of a proposal in > https://github.com/apache/solr/blob/main/dev-docs/plugins-modules-packages.adoc#module-naming > already, but I'd like to discuss the general

Re: [DISCUSS] Standardizing module naming

There is kind of a proposal in https://github.com/apache/solr/blob/main/dev-docs/plugins-modules-packages.adoc#module-naming already, but I'd like to discuss the general idea and what structure makes the most sense here. With my "type" proposal, you can easily map the new names for the various

Re: Modularizing Solr with new contrib packages

Yeah +1 to increase modularization in general. If for some reason this makes the functionality harder to use (which I sympathize with), I think we should instead direct our energy to making modules/packages easier to use. I'm thrilled about Jan's proposal to simply list the module names on bin/sol

Re: [DISCUSS] Standardizing module naming

Now is a great time to do some name changes. I suggest that you make a specific proposal of what the names should be. ~ David Smiley Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 8:18 AM Alessandro Benedetti wrote: > I would also add a tan

Re: Modularizing Solr with new contrib packages

There was a message from Alessandro in another thread , which I'll answer here instead: (I'm posting the full question below my answers here for context) Many questions, and definitely a tangent :) But let me try a short answer >

Re: [DISCUSS] Standardizing module naming

Hi, This is off-topic for this thread. I'll post my answer to the "Moduarizing Solr with new contrib packages" thread if you don't mind https://lists.apache.org/thread/0k6s7h95yzwvhyk8049mr254ywr8vt2l Jan - To unsubscribe, e-

Re: [DISCUSS] Standardizing module naming

I would also add a tangential question (rather than answers at this point): What makes a module(contrib) a module(contrib)? *From now on I'll use 'module' where I intend a package under contrib.* I am referring to first-party modules such as ltr or langid. My initial understanding was that a modul

Re: 2022 April, Solr committer meeting

I have never invited so many people to a calendar event, so I trust your opinion, we should always aim to reduce the pain of whom is organizing this extra stuff. So from my side, I am happy to stick with the dev channel communication and the list extracted from yesterday's meeting. An additional +

[DISCUSS] Standardizing module naming

Hi, In https://github.com/apache/solr/blob/main/dev-docs/plugins-modules-packages.adoc#module-naming I suggested standardizing contrib/module names. We did not discuss it in yesterday's committer m