On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Andrew Musselman <andrew.mussel...@gmail.com> wrote: > Seems to me there has been a renewed effort to eat our broccoli, along with > the other ideas people have been bringing on board. > > What are you proposing to put in the board report?
I have not seen significant activity to unify or update the existing code. It's still the same different chunks with different styles, input/output, distributed/not, etc. The doc updates look very positive. To be fair the task of really addressing the technical debt is very large, so even making said dent would be a lot of work. A clean-slate reboot therefore actually seems like a good plan, but that's another question... Concretely, in a board report, I personally would not agree with representing the Spark or H2O work as an agreed future plan or roadmap, right now. Being in the board report makes that impression, as have recent articles/tweets I've seen, so it deserves care. That's why I chimed in, maybe tilting at windmills. >From where I sit with customers, the overall impression is negative among those that have tried to use the code, and usage has gone from few to almost none. I doubt my sample is so different from the whole user population. Much of it is consistency/quality, but some of it's just an interest in non-M/R frameworks. So, I think that current state and set of problems is far more important to acknowledge in a board report than just mentioning some future possibilities, and the latter was the impression I got of the likely content. In fact, it makes the talk about large upcoming possible changes make so much more sense.
