awesome (typo in "Collaborative filtering" (have i spelled it right?) :)
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Andrew Palumbo <[email protected]> wrote: > ok, committed here: > > http://mahout.apache.org/users/basics/algorithms.html > > thx > > > From: [email protected] > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: RE: Mahout 1.0 features (revisited) > > Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 11:49:15 -0400 > > > > 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 > > > > From: [email protected] > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: RE: Mahout 1.0 features (revisited) > > Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 11:46:34 -0400 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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: [email protected] > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > > Great! > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:57 PM, Andrew Palumbo <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Or I can just commit as is and people can have at the organization. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sounds good to me! > > > > > > > > > >
