Andi Vajda wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Mar 2006, Marcelo Matus wrote:
>> So, the status is like:
>> - 1.3.28 works fine but with the performance issue
> Yes, but I've worked them around by sed-post-processing the .py file.
> I consider 1.3.28 usable and plan on releasing PyLucene with it again
>> - 1.3.29 has test failures?
> Yes, some PyLucene unit tests fail, I haven't looked into it since
> 1.3.28 works fine with my workaround, for now.
> The failure said something about calling a method called 'getValues'
> on an object of type PySwigObject. The 'getValues()' method does exist
> on the object that is supposed to be called. I suspect, something
> didn't get wrapped as it's supposed to. All PyLucene unit tests pass
> when built with 1.3.28.
hmmm, yes, it seems a method is returnng the 'this' (PySwigObject)
instead of the proxy object.
William will try to make a release on Monday or Tuesday, so, probably we
will need to
fix this in the next version.
>> If that is the case, I can send you the last CVS tar file while
>> sourceforge recovers.
> You did send it to me but our mail server's virus checker helpfully
> scraped it thinking it was too large :(
> If you put it up somewhere for download, I'll give it a try.
I don't know where to put it, by in the meantime, CVS is up again....
> Thanks !
Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.