On 24-Mar-08, at 3:32 AM, Leonardo Santagada wrote:
On 24/03/2008, at 04:39, Christian Vogler wrote:
On Monday 24 March 2008 01:01:59 Leonardo Santagada wrote:
I have done some modifications on the solr python client[1], and
though we kept the same license and my work could be put back in
solr
I think if there are more people interested we could improve the
module a lot.
Have you taken a look at SOLR-216 on the issue tracker? I've been
using this
version in production, and it is quite nice.
Maybe it is possible to take the best from both versions?
Thanks, I think most of the stuff that I wanted to do is there... I
will take a closer look and if there is omething missing I will add
to that. Why is this on the issue tracker and was not commited to
the svn?
One word: unittests.
I would like to get a better python library included with solr, but I
am personally not willing to commit something that does not come with
tests. There is too high a chance that future versions will break the
old client without anyone noticing (it has already happened with the
current version), and it makes it too hard to make sure a bug stays
"nailed down".
That said, SOLR-216 is probably a good place to start; it has gone
through at least one round of review. I fully support having a
robust, featured python client for Solr!
-Mike
