Bug 529433

Summary:	Update to 2.4.1, 2.9.0
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Orion Poplawski <orion>
Component:	lucene	Assignee:	Deepak Bhole <dbhole>
Status:	CLOSED RAWHIDE	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	12	CC:	akurtako, dbhole, oget.fedora
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2010-10-01 21:55:31 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	529441

Description Orion Poplawski 2009-10-16 19:55:30 UTC

Description of problem:

Could we get updates to 2.4.1 in F12 and maybe 2.9.0 in F13?  I've got a 2.4.1 package ready to go.  2.9.0 still has compile errors (looks like it needs common-compress 1.0).

I'm trying to package apache pdfbox, but it requires 2.4.1 to build.

Comment 1 Orion Poplawski 2009-10-16 20:14:10 UTC

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1750630

I can check it in and build if that is okay.

Comment 2 Orion Poplawski 2009-10-19 20:55:54 UTC

Looks like gcj does not support Pattern.LITERAL, so 2.9.0 would have to drop gcj support at the moment.

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1755404

Comment 3 Orion Poplawski 2009-11-07 15:58:44 UTC

Looks like 2.9.1 just got released.  I'm happy to check in and build whatever versions seem appropriate.

Comment 4 Bug Zapper 2009-11-16 13:46:02 UTC

This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 12 development cycle.
Changing version to '12'.

More information and reason for this action is here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping

Comment 5 Orcan Ogetbil 2009-11-26 09:06:02 UTC

ping? please update!

Comment 6 Orion Poplawski 2009-12-01 16:08:16 UTC

I've updated rawhide to 2.4.1.  If anything else needs updated or someone wants rawhide to go to 3.0.0, post the reasons here.

Comment 7 Orcan Ogetbil 2009-12-02 02:34:28 UTC

I just have one question: Why only rawhide?

Comment 8 Orion Poplawski 2009-12-02 03:28:25 UTC

I tend to be pretty conservative with updates to releases.  Especially packages I don't own :-).  If there is strong reasons to push to F12 (or even F11), I'm all ears.  For the stuff I've been working on, there is still a lot more packaging work to be done, so rawhide is sufficient.  Would be nice if Deepak could put in his opinion.

Comment 9 Alexander Kurtakov 2010-02-10 13:55:03 UTC

Please don't push new lucene version to released version unless you test that search in Eclipse Help Center is still working with the new lucene version.