On Feb 1, 2007, at 6:47 AM, Zaheed Haque wrote:
I think trying to tackle two problem (Learning Solr as well as
solrb/flare) at the
same time is giving the problem. While I was writing the i18n unit
test I found
out the 100% test cov. thats really cool. Now in terms of docs.. I
think it would
be great if I have a
- TODO file under client/ruby/solrb. What I mean is that - lot of
times
I find information in wiki which applies to Solr but I don't know
if it applies
to solr-ruby-api. So it would be nice to have a TODO file (Things
that is
not available in solr-ruby yet. Makes my life easier.
We have our own solrb TODO list on the wiki: <http://wiki.apache.org/
solr/solrb/ToDo>, also note the "rake todo" task that will produce a
list of all the TBD/TODO/FIXME lines in the code.
- I am completely lost in terms of facets.. I would love to have
some more info
about it. I couldn't follow the facet's part of the code when i was
looking at the test/unit/standard_request.rb and standard_response.rb,
It would be nice if
there were some explanation regarding facets in the .rb files.
Quite fair enough.
However, rather than reinvent the wheel, have you read these?
- <http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrFacetingOverview>
- <http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SimpleFacetParameters>
Granted the difference is that through solrb we map more readable
names to the arguments, along a sensible data-structure of parameters:
request = Solr::Request::Standard.new(:query => 'query',
:facets => {
:fields => [:genre,
# field that overrides the global facet parameters
{:year =>
{:limit => 50, :mincount => 0, :missing =>
false, :sort => :term, :prefix=>"199"}}],
:queries => ["q1", "q2"],
:prefix => "cat",
:limit => 5, :zeros => true, :mincount => 20, :sort
=> :count # global facet parameters
}
)
I have to stop and laugh when I see this versus the vastly more
succinct query string this generates, and wonder if the syntactic
sugar is really worth it :) One nicety is that nested values like a
field-specific override of the mincount is easier to visually parse
with the Ruby code.
So while I'm in complete agreement with you that solrb's rdocs need
lots of improvements, I also don't want the docs to be a copy of what
Solr docs already explain nicely.
If you prefer, what I could do is comment the code as I see it based
on the functional
test and then you can edit it this way we could beef up the doc rather
quick. Its not that
many files so I could give it a shot by end day tomorrow. Off course
except Facets :-)
Sure thing! Patches are always welcome, and even more welcome when
they are documentation patches :)
Erik
