Thank you guys for the feedback! I'll just commit the reorganized page in place
of the current "List of Algorithms" page as is and the experts on each section
can have at it / reorganize as they see fit.
I know that this page is not a big deal but my goal is to clarify- not confuse-
so I really appreciate the eyes!
Another concern is that the page did not reflect the Hierarchical design of the
new code.. ie. the Engine-bindings inheriting from and optimizing math-scala,
which I think is a huge Mahout strong point. Maybe that is for another page...
Thanks for the comments, Thejas...
> > > I guess another thing that could be added would be (needs
> > > development) so that developer can dig in and start working.this is a
> > > good idea but might clutter the page, Instead maybe we can make it known
> > > that anything (non- MR) without a marker "needs development". Then maybe
> > > an explanation/link from the "How to Contribute page" regarding this fact.
> > > I think this is a very clear, and another thing we can add is maybe
> > > a link to the source code of the algorithm or an example/tutorial.I like
> > > this idea very much- maybe moving the doc links over to the algo column
> > > and then having the markers link to directly to the github source. The
> > > only problem i can think of here is that eg. "Item-Based Collaborative
> > > Filtering" has docs for both MapReduce and Spark, and in the future this
> > > may occur more often- though with the legacy status of MapReduce and the
> > > recent abstraction of CLI drivers, probably won't.
It would be nice to have another dimension to work in.
Thanks again,
Andy
> Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 10:54:09 +0200
> Subject: Re: Mahout 1.0 features (revisited)
> From: fr...@frankscholten.nl
> To: dev@mahout.apache.org
>
> Great!
>
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:57 PM, Andrew Palumbo <ap....@outlook.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Or I can just commit as is and people can have at the organization.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Sounds good to me!
> >
