+1 to a java only RC.. I bumped the issue that I'd created yesterday for the binaries to 0.13.1, and moved the readme.md issue down from critical to blocker.
Gonna work on that real quick right now. ________________________________ From: Pat Ferrel <p...@occamsmachete.com> Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2017 3:38:46 PM To: dev@mahout.apache.org Subject: Re: New RC? Makes sense to me, I can’t test the 2 GPU versions. If 0.13.0 that is java only do we have an RC or code freeze to test? On Mar 18, 2017, at 1:43 PM, Andrew Palumbo <ap....@outlook.com> wrote: Or rather if you're both in favor of it.. get the source/java only version out as 0.13.0 and follow up with automated building g and testing framework for 0.13.1. Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone -------- Original message -------- From: Andrew Palumbo <ap....@outlook.com> Date: 03/18/2017 1:40 PM (GMT-08:00) To: dev@mahout.apache.org Subject: RE: New RC? Ok.. let's revisit after we get first out the door. Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone -------- Original message -------- From: Andrew Musselman <andrew.mussel...@gmail.com> Date: 03/18/2017 1:34 PM (GMT-08:00) To: dev@mahout.apache.org Subject: Re: New RC? That's what I'd prefer too. On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 1:28 PM, Trevor Grant <trevor.d.gr...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm yes and no about that. > > Yes- because, yea awesome. > > no- bc of limited testing bandwidth. > > I'd be more in favor of lets push 0.13.0 with minimal binary support, and > then get IT testing all sured up (MAHOUT-1949) and then do another release > soon, with very little additional code, but add native solvers and spark > 2.0/scala 2.11 binaries > > e.g. lets just get the current one out the door and then focus on > automation to make future release cycles quicker and less painful. > > just my .02 > > tg > > Trevor Grant > Data Scientist > https://github.com/rawkintrevo > http://stackexchange.com/users/3002022/rawkintrevo > http://trevorgrant.org > > *"Fortunate is he, who is able to know the causes of things." -Virgil* > > > On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Andrew Palumbo <ap....@outlook.com> > wrote: > >> Ahh.. thats true.. they should be added in with profiles, so they're only >> activated when the distribution is built specifically for them. >> >> >> ReE: the distribution, I'd like to put three out.. one java only, one >> java/OpenMP, and one Java/OpenMP/OpenCL. >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Trevor Grant <trevor.d.gr...@gmail.com> >> Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 3:59:48 PM >> To: dev@mahout.apache.org >> Subject: Re: New RC? >> >> I didn't realize we had intended to add viennaCl jars to binary >> distibution... Cool if we do though. >> >> tg >> >> Trevor Grant >> Data Scientist >> https://github.com/rawkintrevo >> http://stackexchange.com/users/3002022/rawkintrevo >> http://trevorgrant.org >> >> *"Fortunate is he, who is able to know the causes of things." -Virgil* >> >> >> On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Andrew Palumbo <ap....@outlook.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I think we have a few minor changes that we could add (updating >> readme.md >>> eg..).. but more importantly when going through the poms this week, I >>> noticed that the viennacl jars are not being added to the binary >>> distribution artifact. >>> >>> Have not started a jira for it because I'm unsure of the fix, but > I'll >>> add one shortly.. def a blocker though.. until that is fixed No need > for >> an >>> RC IMO. >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> >>> >>> Sent from my Galaxy Tab A >>> >>> >>> -------- Original message -------- >>> From: Trevor Grant <trevor.d.gr...@gmail.com> >>> Date: 3/18/17 2:59 PM (GMT-05:00) >>> To: dev@mahout.apache.org >>> Subject: New RC? >>> >>> Are we cutting a new RC this weekend? >>> >>> tg >>> >>> Trevor Grant >>> Data Scientist >>> https://github.com/rawkintrevo >>> http://stackexchange.com/users/3002022/rawkintrevo >>> http://trevorgrant.org >>> >>> *"Fortunate is he, who is able to know the causes of things." -Virgil* >>> >> >
