http://ayende.comAyende @ RahienCopyright (C) Ayende Rahien 2004 - 2021 (c) 202660Carl, Because that wouldn't really be a good choice. We offer features that are part of a complete package, that make sense to be used overall. What you suggest would cause a LOT of support headaches for us, and wouldn't result in a coherent product. There are already things out there that expose Lucene, such as Solr. They aren't a document database like RavenDB.http://ayende.com/156706/geo-location-spatial-searches-with-ravendb-part-vii-ravendb-client-vs-separate-rest-service#comment2http://ayende.com/156706/geo-location-spatial-searches-with-ravendb-part-vii-ravendb-client-vs-separate-rest-service#comment2Tue, 10 Jul 2012 04:53:38 GMTExactly! Most of our public facing APIs follow this paradigm. Facade and domain model layers in all cases just increase complexity and reduce functionality. For our application, we've created what is effectively a REST service layer that is able to call the .Net runtime directly. My question is why isn't lucene.net and essent just exposed directly through RavenDB? The object model that RavenDB provides is about 10% of the things that we can do directly in lucene.net.http://ayende.com/156706/geo-location-spatial-searches-with-ravendb-part-vii-ravendb-client-vs-separate-rest-service#comment1http://ayende.com/156706/geo-location-spatial-searches-with-ravendb-part-vii-ravendb-client-vs-separate-rest-service#comment1Mon, 09 Jul 2012 18:15:30 GMT