Yes, I think it is better to be backward compatible or the impact of moving to the new solr version would be big.
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar < shalinman...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 8:16 PM, Uri Boness <ubon...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Is it really a problem? I mean, as i see it, solr to cores is what RDBMS > is > > to databases. When you connect to a database you also need to specify the > > database name. > > > > > The problem is compatibility. If we make solr.xml compulsory then we only > force people to do a configuration change. But if we make a core name > mandatory, then we force them to change their applications (or the > applications' configurations). It is better if we can avoid that. Besides, > if there's only one core, why need a name? > > -- > Regards, > Shalin Shekhar Mangar. >
