Uploaded image for project: 'Solr'
  1. Solr
  2. SOLR-9293

Solrj client support for hierarchical clusters and other topics marker

    Details

    • Type: Improvement
    • Status: Resolved
    • Priority: Trivial
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: 6.4, 7.0
    • Component/s: None
    • Security Level: Public (Default Security Level. Issues are Public)
    • Labels:
      None

      Activity

      Hide
      jira-bot ASF subversion and git services added a comment -

      Commit fb83d64eac0a88e7a78e74b713da090c63c1daad in lucene-solr's branch refs/heads/branch_6x from Dawid Weiss
      [ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=lucene-solr.git;h=fb83d64 ]

      SOLR-9293: Solrj client support for hierarchical clusters and other topics marker.

      Show
      jira-bot ASF subversion and git services added a comment - Commit fb83d64eac0a88e7a78e74b713da090c63c1daad in lucene-solr's branch refs/heads/branch_6x from Dawid Weiss [ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=lucene-solr.git;h=fb83d64 ] SOLR-9293 : Solrj client support for hierarchical clusters and other topics marker.
      Hide
      jira-bot ASF subversion and git services added a comment -

      Commit 7fb72bfe10d84d3419b07a8782418f86ab075a56 in lucene-solr's branch refs/heads/master from Dawid Weiss
      [ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=lucene-solr.git;h=7fb72bf ]

      SOLR-9293: Solrj client support for hierarchical clusters and other topics marker.

      Show
      jira-bot ASF subversion and git services added a comment - Commit 7fb72bfe10d84d3419b07a8782418f86ab075a56 in lucene-solr's branch refs/heads/master from Dawid Weiss [ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=lucene-solr.git;h=7fb72bf ] SOLR-9293 : Solrj client support for hierarchical clusters and other topics marker.
      Hide
      dsmiley David Smiley added a comment -

      No patch for review first? it's weird this project is officially CTR (not sure where this is declared) yet tons of defacto convention so we're actually RTC. I admit it's tempting to embrace this CTR to just get stuff committed expediently. I hope we all remain open to review comments after-commit.

      Show
      dsmiley David Smiley added a comment - No patch for review first? it's weird this project is officially CTR (not sure where this is declared) yet tons of defacto convention so we're actually RTC. I admit it's tempting to embrace this CTR to just get stuff committed expediently. I hope we all remain open to review comments after-commit.
      Hide
      jira-bot ASF subversion and git services added a comment -

      Commit 7fb72bfe10d84d3419b07a8782418f86ab075a56 in lucene-solr's branch refs/heads/apiv2 from Dawid Weiss
      [ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=lucene-solr.git;h=7fb72bf ]

      SOLR-9293: Solrj client support for hierarchical clusters and other topics marker.

      Show
      jira-bot ASF subversion and git services added a comment - Commit 7fb72bfe10d84d3419b07a8782418f86ab075a56 in lucene-solr's branch refs/heads/apiv2 from Dawid Weiss [ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=lucene-solr.git;h=7fb72bf ] SOLR-9293 : Solrj client support for hierarchical clusters and other topics marker.
      Hide
      dweiss Dawid Weiss added a comment -

      I don't think we have any formal processes (if I understand your acronyms right). To me common sense and trust I have in other people's judgement typically works best. This applies to both when asking for help on solutions I'm not so confident in and when I think there's simply not that much to discuss because the patch/commit is trivial or self-explanatory.

      This particular issue was filed by me a good while ago, it doesn't change anything in terms of existing functionality and it patched a functional hole with means that are neither controversial, nor that difficult to understand. I honestly didn't think it was worth bothering people with requests for reviews of something that is, in essence, a trivial extension of existing code.

      Obviously you do have the right to speak up if there's something wrong with a commit. And I'm more then willing to revert and reiterate if this is the case.

      Show
      dweiss Dawid Weiss added a comment - I don't think we have any formal processes (if I understand your acronyms right). To me common sense and trust I have in other people's judgement typically works best. This applies to both when asking for help on solutions I'm not so confident in and when I think there's simply not that much to discuss because the patch/commit is trivial or self-explanatory. This particular issue was filed by me a good while ago, it doesn't change anything in terms of existing functionality and it patched a functional hole with means that are neither controversial, nor that difficult to understand. I honestly didn't think it was worth bothering people with requests for reviews of something that is, in essence, a trivial extension of existing code. Obviously you do have the right to speak up if there's something wrong with a commit. And I'm more then willing to revert and reiterate if this is the case.

        People

        • Assignee:
          dweiss Dawid Weiss
          Reporter:
          dweiss Dawid Weiss
        • Votes:
          0 Vote for this issue
          Watchers:
          3 Start watching this issue

          Dates

          • Created:
            Updated:
            Resolved:

            Development