On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Anand Avati <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > The initial approach of allowing implementation of algo in Java language > did follow this approach. There is an example KMeans implemented in Java in > "Mahout style" - > > https://github.com/tdunning/h2o-matrix/blob/master/src/main/java/ai/h2o/algo/KMeans.java- > that works, even in a distributed way. But the focus now has been to > do > something similar through the DSL rather than Java lang - which is really > the interesting part of the integration. I can only hope that the entire > effort does not get prematurely dismissed or killed purely on a matter of > principle! > > Ok, Anand, if i am allowed to make a suggestion, try to use those exact concerns (and all smaller ones that may lead to individual mahout commits) to form a few smaller issues and file them separately with clearly defined intent as you just did. Also if you intend to file an exploratory issue for the sole purpose of exchanging of opinions, rather than a final contribution work, please clearly say so in the name and description. By default all issues are considered as having a contribution intent, and given consideration from that point of view. When one files an issue called "h2o integration" with descripton as it was, it is too loose, too bulky and too open to interpretation. Even Mahout PMC Chair inquired about Software grant, let alone all the rest of the spectrum of conjectures that resulted. This (software grant) does not happen for a simple contribution, this implies the entire project code base move. Your intent clearly have been benign, but this is an example of not so well stated intent in the issue and resulted in too much energy channeled on wishful thinking. Hope this did not come off as lecturing on jira -- truly it was not my intent. > >
