From: Lachlan A. <lh...@us...> - 2004-05-13 12:59:01
|
On Sun, 9 May 2004 11:38 am, Jim wrote: > Hi Lachlan - Based on your response, I guess I am not clear on > exactly what you were suggesting originally. It sounded like you > wanted feedback on the idea of creating a 3.3 branch that was 3.1.6 > + back-ports. Were you excluding phrase search from the candidate > back-ports? I'm not really clear on what I was suggesting either :) I didn't mean to exclude phrase search entirely. It probably isn't surprising that the most useful enhancement is also the most troublesome one. > If adding some level of proximity search to 3.1.6 is considered too > disruptive and 3.2 is leading down the wrong path, both of which > seem at least somewhat likely at this point, then my suggestion > would be to pick up some of the easy wins with a 3.1.7 and give > thought to a 3.3 branch that does not start out overly constrained > by any existing code base. > > Hopefully some of the people with better knowledge of the current > code's features and limitations can chime in at some point. My impression is that the ht://Dig project is basically dead :( The existing code is of course still functional (and thanks Jim and Gilles for all the support you give to the users!), but I don't think there is enough enthusiasm to either release a new version, either 3.2 or 3.3. If I get enthusiastic in the next couple of weeks, I might still try to put 3.2.0b6 together, but that is about as far as it will go... It's been nice getting to know you all :) Lachlan -- lh...@us... ht://Dig developer DownUnder (http://www.htdig.org) |