On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 12:12:41AM -0800, Tom Fawcett wrote: > From my use of scikit-learn I view it more as a CRAN or CPAN (or PyPi) > ecosystem:
That's because you are not on the receiving end when there is a problem with something coded in scikit-learn. The equivalent of CRAN is PyPi: there are different package maintainer for each package. > it’s a fairly loose framework supporting many plug-in modules of > varying quality. We would like it to be tight, and of high quality. > There are many alternatives for a given task so it’s much more of a > pick-and-choose ensemble. I agree here, but we are bandwidth limited, and need to include only the most important alternatives for lack of time. > Beyond that I don’t see why scikit-learn imposes popularity thresholds > on contributions. Because code is maintenance cost, and we need to balance the amount of code we have with the size of the team (and add to this the fact that complexity scales non linearly with the number of features). > But I didn’t come here to argue. Sure. Thanks a lot for understanding. I am just trying to explain the reasons behind this. Cheers, Gaël ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=164703151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Scikit-learn-general mailing list Scikit-learn-general@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scikit-learn-general
