So, it looks like the patch on MAHOUT-222 is ready to go -- could someone commit it?
(apologies for the blank messages there) On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 1:00 PM, Benson Margulies <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, we can't make a circle. We could have three: > > jet, core collections (maps and lists), more math (vectors and matrixes) > > but this is probably hopeless, and sticking with one is better. > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Jake Mannix <[email protected]> wrote: >> But much of the math stuff is built out of the collections stuff (what is a >> vector >> but a collection of doubles and ints...) >> >> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Benson Margulies >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Would heads explode if I suggested two new components: mahout-math and >>> mahout-collections, the second depending on the first? >>> >>> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Jake Mannix <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > As far as I'm concerned, we can probably do this in steps, as long as we >>> > stabilize before 0.3, so no pushing down for now. >>> > >>> > -jake >>> > >>> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Drew Farris <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> >> That's a good question. I was not going to push them down, but if >>> >> you/others believethat they should be pushed down at this point I'd be >>> >> happy to do so. >>> >> >>> >> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:41 AM, Jake Mannix <[email protected]> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > This all makes sense, I'm just wondering about the fact that now in >>> the >>> >> > top-level >>> >> > in o.a.m.math, we have Vector, Matrix, SparseVector, etc. from the >>> >> original >>> >> > Mahout >>> >> > linear algebra stuff. >>> >> > >>> >> > Should these not get pushed down into the math.matrix subdirectory >>> >> (except >>> >> > for >>> >> > the functions which go down into math.function)? >>> >> > >>> >> > I can see *not* pushing them down, because it completely intermingles >>> our >>> >> > old >>> >> > code with the Colt stuff, but at some point, they're going to be >>> >> > intermingled, right? >>> >> > >>> >> > -jake >>> >> > >>> >> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 8:32 AM, Drew Farris <[email protected]> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > >>> >> >> As far as the package structure is concerned, Benson proposed >>> >> >> something similar to the the following: >>> >> >> >>> >> >> o.a.m.matrix -> o.a.m.math >>> >> >> o.a.m.jet -> o.a.m.math.jet >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Things currently under o.a.m.matrix would retain their existing >>> names, >>> >> >> with s/matrix/math, for example: >>> >> >> >>> >> >> o.a.m.math.bitvector >>> >> >> o.a.m.math.buffer >>> >> >> o.a.m.math.function >>> >> >> o.a.m.math.list >>> >> >> o.a.m.math.map >>> >> >> o.a.m.math.matrix >>> >> >> >>> >> >> The maven submodule would be changed from mahout-matrix to >>> mahout-math >>> >> >> >>> >> >> As far as committing cleanup changes -- it is whatever is in the >>> patch >>> >> >> to MAHOUT-222, which I have not reviewed Once 222 is committed I'll >>> >> >> submit the reorg patch and more cleanup can proceed from there. I'm >>> >> >> certainly open to alternatives as well, just trying to jump in where >>> I >>> >> >> can help. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Drew >>> >> >> >>> >> >> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Jake Mannix <[email protected] >>> > >>> >> >> wrote: >>> >> >> > So we're committing cleanup changes first, and then doing reorg, >>> >> right? >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > I'm for o.a.m.math, but we need to decide on where stuff goes in >>> >> >> subpackages >>> >> >> > below that, and then where to put stuff as far as maven submodules >>> >> too. >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > -jake >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 8:11 AM, Drew Farris < >>> [email protected]> >>> >> >> wrote: >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> No worries Sean -- it is really great to have your attention on >>> the >>> >> >> issue. >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Sean Owen <[email protected]> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> >> >> > No it's my bad, I missed one word while reading that message too >>> >> fast >>> >> >> >> > and misunderstood. Sorry for over-eagerly jumping in, I'll stay >>> out >>> >> of >>> >> >> >> > this. >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >
