On Tue 26 Oct 2004, Dominic Hargreaves dom@earth.li wrote:
What concrete reasons are there to drop support for S::I?
The supersearch needs a complete rewrite. It's tangled and murky and full of action at a distance. However it's also quite featureful, and most of its features are ones that people have specifically asked for, so I need to retain them.
Now, the way the supersearch works at the moment is that it only uses a very small amount of the functionality of the CGI::Wiki indexers. The essence of the search is done with regexes, and this is why it's so inefficient. There is no way I can see to speed the thing up except by actually using some of the features of the powerful modules that CGI::Wiki uses for indexing.
What I'm working on at the moment is something that will probably end up being called OpenGuides::Indexer. It will use Plucene directly and efficiently.
Does retaining S::I support impose a significant hassle now?
Yes.
I know that Simon has stepped away from maintaining his modules, so it seems foolish to force our users to use Plucene with no alternative at this stage.
As far as I know, Plucene is an important part of a lot of Kasei's code. They are the maintainers now, and I doubt they're going to junk it. Search::InvertedIndex however has essentially been abandoned by its maintainer.
Kake