The beta will have files that where in solr/conf and solr/data in solr/collection1/conf|data instead.
What Solr test cases are you referring to? The only ones that should care about this would have to be looking at the file system. If that is the case, simply update the path. The built in tests had to be adjusted for this as well. The problem with having the default core use /solr as a conf dir is that if you create another core, where does it logically go? The default collection is called collection1, so now its conf and data lives in a folder called collection1. A new SolrCore called newsarticles would have it's conf and data in /solr/newsarticles. There are still going to be some bumps as you move from alpha to beta to release if you are depending on very specific file system locations - however, they should be small bumps that are easily handled. Just send an email to the user list if you'd like some help with anything in particular. In this case, I'd update what you have to look at /solr/collection1 rather than simply /solr. It's still the default core, so simple URLs without the core name will still work. It won't affect HTTP communication. Just file system location. On Jul 14, 2012, at 9:54 PM, Roman Chyla wrote: > Hi, > > Is it intentional that the ALPHA release has a different folder structure > as opposed to the trunk? > > eg. collection1 folder is missing in the ALPHA, but present in branch_4x > and trunk > > lucene-trunk/solr/example/solr/collection1/conf/xslt/example_atom.xsl > 4.0.0-ALPHA/solr/example/solr/conf/xslt/example_atom.xsl > lucene_4x/solr/example/solr/collection1/conf/xslt/example_atom.xsl > > > This has consequences for development - e.g. solr testcases do not expect > that the collection1 is there for ALPHA. > > In general, what is your advice for developers who are upgrading from solr > 3.x to solr 4.x? What codebase should we follow to minimize the pain of > porting to the next BETA and stable releases? > > Thanks! > > roman - Mark Miller lucidimagination.com
