mocobeta commented on issue #29:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/lucene-jira-archive/issues/29#issuecomment-1186138763
I just wanted to let you know that I'm not able to edit the Jira
configuration such as workflow or issue template (I don't have permission). So
anyway, I have to pass it to
mikemccand commented on issue #29:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/lucene-jira-archive/issues/29#issuecomment-1186145578
Hmm OK let me see if I have permissions ;)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
UR
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10557?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17567465#comment-17567465
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-10557:
-
bq. [TEST] This was moved to
mocobeta commented on issue #7:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/lucene-jira-archive/issues/7#issuecomment-1186146650
Once the migration is started, issues opened in Jira have to be manually
migrated to GitHub by the authors afterward and it'd be bothersome.
I wanted to add some texts
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10557?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17567466#comment-17567466
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-10557:
-
OK I am able to administer o
mocobeta commented on PR #1024:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/1024#issuecomment-1186152291
There are five pre-fixed issue templates (forms) written in YAML and they
look like:
- Bug Report
jpountz commented on code in PR #1018:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/1018#discussion_r922674843
##
lucene/core/src/java/org/apache/lucene/search/BooleanWeight.java:
##
@@ -191,6 +191,69 @@ public long cost() {
// or null if it is not applicable
// pkg-private
jpountz commented on code in PR #1018:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/1018#discussion_r922675268
##
lucene/core/src/java/org/apache/lucene/search/BooleanWeight.java:
##
@@ -191,6 +191,69 @@ public long cost() {
// or null if it is not applicable
// pkg-private
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10655?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17567482#comment-17567482
]
Adrien Grand commented on LUCENE-10655:
---
I've been wondering if using a simple in
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10633?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17567485#comment-17567485
]
Adrien Grand commented on LUCENE-10633:
---
Indeed the speedup is impressive. :) I s
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10557?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17567486#comment-17567486
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-10557:
-
Hi [~tomoko] – I added you a
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10557?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17567492#comment-17567492
]
Tomoko Uchida commented on LUCENE-10557:
[~mikemccand] thank you, I'm now able
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10557?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17567495#comment-17567495
]
Tomoko Uchida commented on LUCENE-10557:
it seems "Project admin" is not really
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10557?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17567504#comment-17567504
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-10557:
-
OK hmm we will likely need I
hcqs33 opened a new pull request, #1026:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/1026
Fix error in comparing between bytes of candidates and bytes of max merge.
It's wrong to use `candidateSize` rather than `currentCandidateBytes`
comparing with `maxMergeBytes`. Minor change to fix it.
zacharymorn commented on code in PR #1018:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/1018#discussion_r922765220
##
lucene/core/src/java/org/apache/lucene/search/BooleanWeight.java:
##
@@ -191,6 +191,69 @@ public long cost() {
// or null if it is not applicable
// pkg-priv
zacharymorn commented on code in PR #1018:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/1018#discussion_r922765998
##
lucene/core/src/java/org/apache/lucene/search/BooleanWeight.java:
##
@@ -191,6 +191,69 @@ public long cost() {
// or null if it is not applicable
// pkg-priv
zacharymorn commented on PR #1018:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/1018#issuecomment-1186390917
> Thanks for explaining the motivation for the dedicated bulk scorer, I left
some suggestions.
No problem and thanks for the suggestions! I have incorporated them and like
how c
mocobeta opened a new issue, #48:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-jira-archive/issues/48
### Description
test
### Version and Environments
_No response_
### Lucene Component
component:module/analysis
--
This is an automated message from the Apache G
mocobeta closed issue #48: test issue with component
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-jira-archive/issues/48
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe
zacharymorn commented on PR #1018:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/1018#issuecomment-1186398587
Here are the latest `wikinightly` benchmark results:
```
TaskQPS baseline StdDevQPS
my_modified_version StdDevPct diff p-
zacharymorn commented on PR #1018:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/1018#issuecomment-1186399338
@jpountz If this approach to limiting BMM scorer to top-level disjunctions
looks good to you, I can go ahead and update the corresponding tests to make
this PR ready ?
--
This is an
mocobeta opened a new pull request, #49:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene-jira-archive/pull/49
#27
should be
