> I'll try to create an umbrella JIRA for the "v2 gap"
Just closing the loop here: see SOLR-15734 and its linked tickets. I
created this to cover not just "missing APIs" but anything that seems
needed to get v2 ready to replace v1 (which seemed to be the larger
question in this discussion here).
I did some analysis work on that a while ago, though now I realized I
did not mark it well with V2 perhaps.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14795
Regards,
Alex.
On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 at 16:12, Jason Gerlowski wrote:
>
> > Is there an umbrella Jira with open subtasks for every Api th
> Is there an umbrella Jira with open subtasks for every Api that is not
> covered in V2?
Not that I know of, though I'd like to see one. Checking the name,
semantics, and default values for each parameter of each endpoint for
parity is a big job in itself but it would be helpful, assuming
there
I think there is something wrong with the build of the contrib modules, but
I haven't paid close enough attention to this area to know for sure. I
didn't see any Jira issues that explain this, but didn't have time for a
comprehensive search.
I downloaded
https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Solr/job/S
Can someone qualified comment on
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12281regarding what to do wrt index
back-compat policy in Solr 9.0? Do we want any code changes?
Jan
> 21. okt. 2021 kl. 15:19 skrev Jan Høydahl :
>
> Hi,
>
> The Lucene 9.0 release is starting to materialize with a c
RE Tika: see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-13973 -- if you
have thoughts, I suggest leaving them there, in-context with that topic.
~ David Smiley
Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 9:18 AM Eric Pugh
wrote:
> Did we
Did we want to try and remove Tika (and it’s long list of dependencies) from
Solr 9? The Tika 2.0 project provides a much lighter way of integrating Tika
that could be used in Solr….
> On Oct 22, 2021, at 6:13 PM, Houston Putman wrote:
>
> Dont want to start a bike shed here, but on the v2
Dont want to start a bike shed here, but on the v2 api topic, I am not in
support of deprecation/removal yet. Beyond the support not being universal,
I think there are a good number of V2 apis that are worse than the v1 apis.
I think if we really want to remove v1 we need to go take another look,
c
Marcus, there are two different things being discussed here - Http2Client and
V2Api. Jason commented on the V2-Api part.is there an umbrella Jira with open
subtasks for every Api that is not covered in V2?
Jan Høydahl
> 22. okt. 2021 kl. 22:57 skrev Marcus Eagan :
>
>
> Jason, You raise a go
Jason, You raise a good point. Can you elaborate on the "big gap" in the
ticket?
The only one I saw in there was DelegationTokenHttpSolrClient, and that is
deprecated itself. I think it would be helpful to enumerate the gaps very
clearly so that people can divide and conquer supporting them for v2
> Is it too early to deprecate V1 APIs in 8.11?
I think so, unfortunately. The docs in particular have seen big
strides in their v2 coverage, but the code itself still has a pretty
big gap to close in terms of bringing the v2 APIs into parity with v1.
A lot of v1 APIs have parameters that aren't
The list seems to be missing
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14290 ? If that's not fixed
folks who have used our test framework for their own tests will have issues.
On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 11:27 AM Jan Høydahl wrote:
> Yep, that is a more precise description :)
>
> Is it too early t
Yep, that is a more precise description :)
Is it too early to deprecate V1 APIs in 8.11? There has been some great effort
to get the v2 APIs up to date lately.
Perhaps for 9.0 it is enough to use V2 in all tutorials and ref-guide, and also
Admin UI. And then deprecate v1 in 9.x and remove in 10.
13 matches
Mail list logo
