Let's see if I have this right. 3x is "1.4.1 with selected features from trunk backported". Which translates as "lots of cool new stuff is in in 3x (geospatial comes to mind, eDismax, etc....) but the more fluid changes are not being backported".
I guess it depends on how risk-averse you are. There are people using both trunk and 3x in production. Personally, though, I'd go with 3x for a project 6 months out unless there's a feature of trunk that would make your life a whole lot easier. Trunk is well- tested, but why take any risk unless there are measurable benefits? You might read through the changes.txt file to see if there's anything in trunk you can't live without.... Best Erick On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 7:30 AM, Jeff Schmidt <j...@535consulting.com> wrote: > Hi Otis: > > I guess I got too obsessed trying to resolve my SolrJ/Solr interaction > problem, I missed your reply... I've heard using 3.1 is the best approach, > and now 4.0/trunk. Will trunk be undergoing a release in the next few months > then? It seems so soon after 3.x. > > Fortunately, I have both branch_3x and trunk checked out and I can generate > Maven artifacts for each one. That makes it easy for me to use one or the > other, at least until I get set on some feature only available in one of > them. Is trunk currently a superset of branch_3x, or are there some 3.x > features that won't be merged into trunk for quite some time? > > Cheers, > > Jeff > > > On Feb 13, 2011, at 6:49 PM, Otis Gospodnetic wrote: > >> Hi Jeff, >> >> For projects that are going live in 6 months I would use trunk. >> >> Otis >> ---- >> Sematext :: http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - Nutch >> Lucene ecosystem search :: http://search-lucene.com/ >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ---- >>> From: Jeff Schmidt <j...@535consulting.com> >>> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org >>> Sent: Sat, February 12, 2011 4:37:37 PM >>> Subject: Which version of Solr? >>> >>> Hello: >>> >>> I'm working on incorporating Solr into a SaaS based life sciences semantic >>> search project. This will be released in about six months. I'm trying to >>> determine which version of Solr makes the most sense. When going to the Solr >>> download page, there are 1.3.0, 1.4.0, and 1.4.1. I've been using 1.4.1 >>> while >>> going through some examples in my Packt book ("Solr 1.4 Enterprise Search >>> Server"). >>> >>> But, I also see that Solr 3.1 and 4.0 are in the works. According to: >>> >>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/#selectedTab=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.project%3Aroadmap-panel >>> >>> >>> there is a high degree of progress on both of those releases; including a >>> slew >>> of bug fixes, new features, performance enhancements etc. Should I be >>> making >>> use of one of the newer versions? The hierarchical faceting seems like it >>> could be quite useful. Are there any guesses on when either 3.1 or 4.0 >>> will be >>> officially released? >>> >>> So far, 1.4.1 has been good. But I'm unable to get SolrJ to work due to the >>> 'javabin' version mismatch. I'm using the 1.4.1 version of SolrJ, but I >>> always >>> get an HTTP response code of 200, but the return entity is simply a null >>> byte, >>> which does not match the version number of 1 defined in Solr common. >>> Anyway, I >>> can follow up on that issue if 1.4.1 is still the most appropriate version >>> to >>> use these days. Otherwise, I'll try again with whatever version you >>> suggest. >>> >>> Thanks a lot! >>> >>> Jeff >>> -- >>> Jeff Schmidt >>> 535 Consulting >>> j...@535consulting.com >>> (650) 423-1068 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > > > > -- > Jeff Schmidt > 535 Consulting > j...@535consulting.com > (650) 423-1068 > http://www.535consulting.com > > > > > > > >
