The main differences from the base:
* Support 0.9.9.
* The ability to automatically generate a configuration file;
* Mysql instead xmlpipe2;
* Minimum configuration file settings through the admin panel (it works with the automatic generation).
Please consider this project, if there are errors try to remove them.

http://drupal.org/sandbox/gagaga/1208656

Comments

alexreinhart’s picture

alexreinhart commented

Is there a reason you could not contribute your features to the original Sphinx project? Generally it's preferable to contribute your work to an existing module, rather than creating a competing module.

gagaga’s picture

gagaga commented

First, the original module has been abandoned long ago. Secondly, the key points are fundamentally different, which allows to allocate a separate module. In addition, this module is laid more widely used, in particular the establishment of submodules to address more specific problems.

gagaga’s picture

gagaga commented

Another reason was that many were unable to adjust polzvateli host module Sphinx search. I would like to increase the number of people who would be able to minimanymi cost ipolzovat host sphinx. I therefore emphasis was placed on the automatic generation, changing some settings via the Web interefeys, potentially more convenient statistics and special range.

alexreinhart’s picture

alexreinhart commented

If the original module has been abandoned, you can ask for maintainership of it so you can add your features (automatic features, better module organization, later Sphinx version support, etc.) to it. There are instructions on how to do this:

http://drupal.org/node/251466

If you can convince the original maintainers that your changes are beneficial, you could make changes to the original Sphinx module rather than creating your own module. This would prevent confusion of new users trying to find good Sphinx integration for Drupal.

gagaga’s picture

gagaga commented

That's the complexity that will spend more time and effort to harmonize and proving his innocence. My module does not add features to the module, and the creation of other principles of operation. Why says that this is some change, if it is a different program, without any inheritance with that module? Also in addition to the module, there are a number of projects on the sphinx. So they have a right to exist. On what basis this is my diskreminatsiya module?

alexreinhart’s picture

alexreinhart commented

The basis is the Drupal module developer's guide, which strongly encourages collaboration on existing projects, rather than creating new modules to duplicate their features. If there's already several Sphinx modules, that's a good reason to not make more -- it's already confusing to new users trying to set up Sphinx integration.

Perhaps someone else can help here. I'm new to the module review process, so I don't know the exact rules.

gagaga’s picture

gagaga commented

Any cooperation must be within reason. Or do you propose to no longer build extensions for the individual modules Views on the sole ground that the creator must cooperate with vievs? If so, then why Drupal core each time the contracts and all shall be made in separate modules? It seems the module you have not seen and the reasoning is carried out only in theory, or the difference you would have noticed. So if one person gave the right to establish projects, why not help another ... Or it does not cooperate?

gor’s picture

gor commented

Hi there.

I think this project has right to be separated from Sphinx project.
It is to different.

We provide sphinx search daemon on our hosting servers for our clients.
As usual we spend at least one hour to help our clients with Sphinx project. It is not so good and it is nice to see more powerful and user friendly module.

Regards, Gor
it-patrol.com - drupal hosting

feloescoto’s picture

feloescoto commented

I do think too that it deserves an independent live on its own, it is not a layer or improvement of the current one. Instead of stopping this one the old one should be the one suffering for been abandoned.

gagaga’s picture

gagaga commented

Hello
It's been days. Somebody will see the module?

gagaga’s picture

gagaga commented

Good afternoon.
Please look at the module and point to trouble spots in it.

pillarsdotnet’s picture

pillarsdotnet commented

Really, it would be okay to take over the old Sphinx project and totally rewrite it.

I did essentially that with the HTML Mail module.

jthorson’s picture

jthorson commented
Status: Needs review » Needs work

It appears that the original 'Sphinx' module isn't actually abandoned ... the maintainer last posted in their issue queue less than two weeks ago. I understand how it might appear abandoned, since there was no activity for over a year prior to that ... but I, too, would like to have seen an issue in the original Sphinx queue asking the maintainer's long-term intentions with the original Sphinx module, and whether they would entertain adding you as a co-maintainer with the 'Advanced Sphinx' code used to establish a 6.x-2.0 version.

They don't have to agree ... but this would have shown that you have at least considered collaboration, and thus avoided the conversation in comments #1 through #9.

I see code in both the 'master' and '6.x-1.x' branches of the repository ... which branch contains the code that you would like us to review?

jthorson’s picture

jthorson commented

In addition, there were a few items I noticed right away ...

  1. Remove the $ID identifiers from the start of all files. These were required in the CVS days, but are not needed now that we have migrated to Git.
  2. Remove your license.txt file. This will be added by the Drupal packaging scripts.
  3. Original strings in t() code must be provided in English in order to properly leverage Drupal's translations capabilities.
  4. define('SPH_MATCH_EXTENDED', 3); Is there any reason this variable does not leverage the advanced_sphinx prefix?
  5. Generally speaking, 3rd party libraries (such as sphinxapi.php) should not be included in your drupal module ... rather, your module should provide instructions on where the library can be obtained. See the 3rd party libraries on Drupal.og handbook page for more information.

This was just a quick peek ... but I'd encourage you to check out the Tips for ensuring a smooth review handbook page and make sure your project aligns with those recommendations as much as possible, while you're waiting for a follow-up review.

misc’s picture

misc commented

@gagaga has been contacted to ask if the application is abandoned.

After ten weeks with a status of needs work: the applicant may be contacted by a reviewer to determine whether the application was indeed abandoned. The action taken by the reviewer should be documented in the project application issue.

http://drupal.org/node/894256

misc’s picture

misc commented
Status: Needs work » Closed (won't fix)

The application has been closed. If you would like to reopen it, you are free to do so.
See http://drupal.org/node/894256#abandonedtwoweekscontact