Just to make sure I understand Dimitry's comment about the # operator. I don't see anything in this patch on a quick look that references a new operator, so that's a separate issue, correct? I see in the related
SOLR-1604 patch the ability to specify inOrder="true|false" as a local parameter, so this functionality is available at that level.
Frankly, I'd rather not introduce a new operator at this stage, let's get the underlying functionality in place and treat any new operators as a separate issue if we add one it at all.
Any responses to the comment by Robert Muir? My quick response is that I've seen use-cases like this:
"Find all the variants of "john anderson, including 'jonathan anderson', 'jon ivan gregory anderson' but not 'eric anderson and jonathan jones' ". Contrived a bit, but you get the idea. Specifying slop doesn't allow this case, but slop with specified order does.
I'm going to be committing this this, along with
SOLR-1604 today unless there are objections. The patch doesn't change current behavior so it seems pretty safe.