On 11/23/11 2:19 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote: > Hello, > > I have had several questions about release plans for 3.0. > > I feel guilty for not having pushed this version out yet. It is not in > release shape now and many thing are still ongoing. Typically, a new > thread as been started a few hours ago about an important change in the > linear algebra API (a needed change, so something important to discuss now). > > As far as I am concerned, here are the points I want to address myself > (but if other people want to help, chime in!). I would like to see what > other developers have in mind so wa can set up a release plan, and > really work toward a release which is past due. > > My personal tasks are: > - finish the adapters wrapping unbounded optimizers into simple bounds > optimizers as set up by Gilles, using the two function adapters > already available > - stabilize Adams based ODE integrators using the > MathUtils.linearCombination feature to ensure better accuracy and > error estimates in the Nordsieck vectors > - perhaps add back the BDF integrator for stiff problems, using the > Nordsieck vectors once it has been stabilized for Adams methods > - perhaps add a Radau integrator > - replace the reset() method in step handler interface by init() > (it's a simple rename), and add a similar init() in the events > interface > - fix the mapping between boundary representation/BSP representation > in 2D/3D > > could other people add to this list the features they want to have in 3.0 ?
I would like to try to get all of the near-term compatibility-breaking stuff into 3.0, which means focusing on the issues that change APIs. We have made great progress on this recently. I would put the linear changes in scope. There are 43 issues open now with 3.0 fix version. There are still 6 "unscheduled." I was comfortable assigning versions to the 6 remaining by myself. It would be great for everyone to have a look at these and propose either 3.0, 3.1 or even 4.0 for these stragglers. Many of the 43 marked for 3.0 are close to complete. I "assigned" some of them to myself, but that is just to help me keep track of what I am working on first. So basically, I would say lets look again at both the 43 and the 6 and see what we can knock off quickly or push out without great fear of having to make API breaks to resolve. One additional item that we should be chipping away at is validating the user guide. Any and all help from the community on this - using the code in trunk as the basis for validation - would be most appreciated. Checkstyle and changes.xml are also in need of some love. Phil > > Luc > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
