In the middle of last month, I started adding a very detailed report of my investigations into various options for record indexing and retrieval in Koha to the end of the Switch to Solr RFC in the wiki, http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Switch_to_Solr_RFC . I moved the report to its own page at http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Record_Indexing_and_Retrieval_Options_fo... and added links from the RFC to content related most directly to the work being done by BibLibre. The report aims at an objective record of facts about the particular options, except where some comparisons containing a point of view are necessary and appropriate in the advantages and disadvantages section. No overall recommendation is contained in the report. The purpose of the report is to provide information to help each of us better inform our judgements for each of our own conclusions. No overall conclusions are included in the report. There are other places for arguing for particular preferences overall including this mailing list. I will offer particular recommendations based on my investigation in some other messages. Yet, aside from the great exception of not abstracting to preserve existing record indexing and retrieval options, I find the choice of software options which BibLibre are taking in their implementation of Solr/Lucene to be reasonable. There will be time in future to address some Koha design deficiencies for record indexing which are unnecessarily preserved in BibLibre's work. I do not criticise BibLibre for where they have not corrected some pre-existing Koha deficiencies. 1. INVESTIGATIONS. The report is the product of much investigation of source code; testing; correspondence with Index Data and Knowledge Integration; and communication with several people including those working on Solr/Lucene record indexing at BibLibre. BibLibre provided a test server for which I was able to verify some Zebra bugs which had been reported by BibLibre before finding some of the bugs in the Zebra bugs database. Despite my efforts, the report may be especially prone to error or omission in the large scope of the problem. A few omissions where I simply did not have sufficient time to describe some aspect of some options are noted in the report or should otherwise be obvious. Corrections of errors and omissions would be greatly appreciated. Very little in the report is the result of direct answers from Index Data and Knowledge Integration. However, both Sebastian Hammer from Index Data and Ian Ibbotson from Knowledge Integration were very helpful in giving guidance about options to investigate. I have special thanks to give to Ian Ibbotson who was especially helpful when I followed some clues which both he and Sebastian had left in messages referring to some challenges of implementing Solr/Lucene. Some of my follow up questions have gone unanswered but few people are able to sustain giving sufficient answers to questions even when paid to do so. 2. SECTIONS. 2.1. OPTIONS. Sections of the report identify options for basic functional uses of record indexing and retrieval. Options are described for the possibility of mixing and matching options together instead of an exhaustive list of all possible combinations. 2.2. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES. Each option has an advantages and disadvantages section. In trying to have a balanced presentation, some aspect of particular options listed in the advantages subsection are also listed in the disadvantages subsection with summary explanation about the disadvantageous part of that particular aspect. 2.3. CONFIGURATION. A configuration section identifies the files and scripts used to configure the various options which are most helpful in comparing options. Links to source code have been provided where possible. Summary comparison has been the goal not completeness but I welcome more complete improvements. BibLibre work on configuration supporting Solr/Lucene is summarised with links to source code. Some links to BibLibre demonstrations of their proof of concept and work in progress have not yet been included. Please help keep BibLibre configuration work in progress for supporting Solr/Lucene updated. 2.4. CODE FUNCTIONALITY. A summary of code functionality is given for each option. Links to source code have been provided where possible. This section is the one most likely to have mistakes which need correcting especially for how various Index Data programs relate to YAZ in the sequence of calls back and forth. I used logic rather than reading the source code in some cases. BibLibre work on code functionality supporting Solr/Lucene is summarised with links to source code. Some links to BibLibre demonstrations of their proof of concept and work in progress have not yet been included. Please help keep BibLibre code functionality work in progress for supporting Solr/Lucene updated. Thomas Dukleth Agogme 109 E 9th Street, 3D New York, NY 10003 USA http://www.agogme.com +1 212-674-3783