improve test coverage for omitNorms and omitTFAP [LUCENE-2738]
- Dominant language
- Java
- Stars
- 3.6k
- Forks
- 1.4k
- Avg merge
- 2d 11h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 88
Description
just expands on what lucenetestcase does already...
if you say Analyzed_NO_NORMS, we might set norms anyway.
in the same sense, if you say Index.NO, we might index it anyway, and might set omitTFAP etc.
---
Migrated from [LUCENE-2738](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2738) by Robert Muir (@rmuir), updated May 09 2016
Attachments: [LUCENE-2738.patch](https://apache.github.io/lucene-jira-archive/attachments/LUCENE-2738/LUCENE-2738.patch) (versions: 3)
Contributor guide
Research direction
Start by reading the existing LuceneTestCase behavior and the attached LUCENE-2738.patch, then locate tests covering Analyzed_NO_NORMS, Index.NO, and omitTFAP. Done means the relevant test coverage explicitly exercises these flags and verifies the resulting norms, indexing, and term-frequency/position behavior.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- java
- Domain
- testing
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100