Compound types are young and will probably mutate. I will do my own
hack until things settle down.
Lance
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 12:47 AM, Mark Allan wrote:
> On 7 Jul 2010, at 6:24 pm, Yonik Seeley wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 8:15 AM, Grant Ingersoll
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Originally, I had
On 7 Jul 2010, at 6:24 pm, Yonik Seeley wrote:
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 8:15 AM, Grant Ingersoll
wrote:
Originally, I had intended that it was just for one Field Sub Type,
thinking that if we ever wanted multiple sub types, that a new,
separate class would be needed
Right - this was my ori
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 8:15 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> Originally, I had intended that it was just for one Field Sub Type, thinking
> that if we ever wanted multiple sub types, that a new, separate class would
> be needed
Right - this was my original thinking too. AbstractSubTypeFieldType
i
Currently our only requirement is to be able to search on the
numerical part of the daterange field, so our field type overrides
getRangeQuery and getFieldQuery to consider only the first two
subfields. If we wanted to be able to search the name subfield as
well, I suppose we could do some
This looks reasonable. I'll take a look at the patch. Originally, I had
intended that it was just for one Field Sub Type, thinking that if we ever
wanted multiple sub types, that a new, separate class would be needed, but if
this proves to be clean this way, then I see no reason not to incorpo
On 3 Jul 2010, at 1:50 am, Chris Hostetter wrote:
: The changes to AbstractSubTypeFieldType do not have any adverse
effects on the
: solr.PointType class, so I'd quite like to suggest it gets
included in the
: main solr source code. Where can I send a patch for someone to
evaluate or
: s
: The changes to AbstractSubTypeFieldType do not have any adverse effects on the
: solr.PointType class, so I'd quite like to suggest it gets included in the
: main solr source code. Where can I send a patch for someone to evaluate or
: should I just attach it to the issue in JIRA and see what hap
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Mark Allan wrote:
[...]
> The changes to AbstractSubTypeFieldType do not have any adverse effects on
> the solr.PointType class, so I'd quite like to suggest it gets included in
> the main solr source code. Where can I send a patch for someone to evaluate
> or shou
