Le 14/10/2014 20:14, Ole Ersoy a écrit :
>
>
> On 10/14/2014 12:32 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>> Le 14/10/2014 17:46, Ole Ersoy a écrit :
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have 1 open pull request for MathIllegalStateException (Simple update
>>> to description - Gilles approved) that has been sitting for a while,
On 10/14/2014 02:13 PM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
Le 14/10/2014 20:14, Ole Ersoy a écrit :
It just occurred to me to go to https://github.com/apache/commons-math
to see whether the pull requests are visible. It also looks like github
combines all my commits into one pull request. I assumed that
Le 14/10/2014 20:14, Ole Ersoy a écrit :
> It just occurred to me to go to https://github.com/apache/commons-math
> to see whether the pull requests are visible. It also looks like github
> combines all my commits into one pull request. I assumed that I had to
> do them individually. So if this
On 10/14/2014 12:32 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
Le 14/10/2014 17:46, Ole Ersoy a écrit :
Hi,
I have 1 open pull request for MathIllegalStateException (Simple update
to description - Gilles approved) that has been sitting for a while, so
I just wanted to make sure it's visible. I tried creating
Le 14/10/2014 17:46, Ole Ersoy a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> I have 1 open pull request for MathIllegalStateException (Simple update
> to description - Gilles approved) that has been sitting for a while, so
> I just wanted to make sure it's visible. I tried creating another for
I forgot about it, sorry. C
Hi,
I have 1 open pull request for MathIllegalStateException (Simple update to
description - Gilles approved) that has been sitting for a while, so I just
wanted to make sure it's visible. I tried creating another for the
AbstractIntegerDistributionTest, but github does not enable any buttons
Le 07/10/2014 20:15, Luc Maisonobe a écrit :
> Le 07/10/2014 17:34, Ole Ersoy a écrit :
>> Do I need to wait for the repositories to become synchronized before
>> doing another pull request? It's only a tiny documentation change.
>
> No, you can do it with the current repository, we'll refactor t
Le 07/10/2014 17:34, Ole Ersoy a écrit :
> Do I need to wait for the repositories to become synchronized before
> doing another pull request? It's only a tiny documentation change.
No, you can do it with the current repository, we'll refactor the patch
as needed.
best regards
Luc
>
> Thanks,
>
Do I need to wait for the repositories to become synchronized before doing
another pull request? It's only a tiny documentation change.
Thanks,
- Ole
On 10/03/2014 06:46 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
Le 02/10/2014 17:51, Ole Ersoy a écrit :
Hello Luc, Gilles, and Benedikt,
I'm here :). From my
Le 03/10/2014 16:46, Ole Ersoy a écrit :
> Ooops - Sorry Luc, slight mental glitch there - I wrote Luke instead of
> Luc :).
Use git push --force, Luc :)
Emmanuel Bourg
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.o
Ooops - Sorry Luc, slight mental glitch there - I wrote Luke instead of Luc :).
Cheers,
- Ole
On 10/03/2014 06:46 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
Le 02/10/2014 17:51, Ole Ersoy a écrit :
Hello Luc, Gilles, and Benedikt,
I'm here :). From my limited github experience, I do think most
contributors d
Gilles, Luke, Phil,
I respect what you are saying. All I'm saying is that I think using Git to
it's full potential will be more attractive and less confusing to future
contributors. I'm really not trying to lobby strongly for this though. I just
shared my thoughts on it in case the move to
The reason there is a difference is that the GitHub mirror was based on
an early git mirror when our main repository was subversion. We have
switched to Git only a few weeks ago, and the official original git
repository has been recreated from the subversion history, not from the
other git mirror.
Le 02/10/2014 17:51, Ole Ersoy a écrit :
> Hello Luc, Gilles, and Benedikt,
>
> I'm here :). From my limited github experience, I do think most
> contributors do their communication directly through github. I've seen
> a lot of projects use issues for discussion. I personally like this,
> becau
Hi all,
Le 03/10/2014 12:17, Gilles a écrit :
> Hi.
>
> On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 15:35:53 -0500, Ole Ersoy wrote:
>> On 10/02/2014 02:18 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>> On 10/2/14 11:33 AM, Ole Ersoy wrote:
Hi,
On 10/02/2014 11:34 AM, Gilles wrote:
> Hello.
>
> On Thu, 02 Oct 201
Hi.
On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 15:35:53 -0500, Ole Ersoy wrote:
On 10/02/2014 02:18 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 10/2/14 11:33 AM, Ole Ersoy wrote:
Hi,
On 10/02/2014 11:34 AM, Gilles wrote:
Hello.
On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 10:51:53 -0500, Ole Ersoy wrote:
Hello Luc, Gilles, and Benedikt,
I'm here :). Fr
On 10/02/2014 02:18 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 10/2/14 11:33 AM, Ole Ersoy wrote:
Hi,
On 10/02/2014 11:34 AM, Gilles wrote:
Hello.
On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 10:51:53 -0500, Ole Ersoy wrote:
Hello Luc, Gilles, and Benedikt,
I'm here :). From my limited github experience, I do think most
contribu
On 10/2/14 11:33 AM, Ole Ersoy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 10/02/2014 11:34 AM, Gilles wrote:
>> Hello.
>>
>> On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 10:51:53 -0500, Ole Ersoy wrote:
>>> Hello Luc, Gilles, and Benedikt,
>>>
>>> I'm here :). From my limited github experience, I do think most
>>> contributors do their communic
Hi,
On 10/02/2014 11:34 AM, Gilles wrote:
Hello.
On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 10:51:53 -0500, Ole Ersoy wrote:
Hello Luc, Gilles, and Benedikt,
I'm here :). From my limited github experience, I do think most
contributors do their communication directly through github.
"Commons" contributors?
I sh
Hello.
On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 10:51:53 -0500, Ole Ersoy wrote:
Hello Luc, Gilles, and Benedikt,
I'm here :). From my limited github experience, I do think most
contributors do their communication directly through github.
"Commons" contributors?
I've
seen a lot of projects use issues for discu
Hello Luc, Gilles, and Benedikt,
I'm here :). From my limited github experience, I do think most contributors
do their communication directly through github. I've seen a lot of projects
use issues for discussion. I personally like this, because it makes it easy to
get up to speed on design
On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 11:48:19 +0200, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
Hi Luc,
this emails are outgenerated when a PR is created at github, so I
wouldn't
expect the contributor to be subscribed to the list. It's probably
better
to comment on the PR at github.
Sorry to intervene; but why is it better to
Hi Luc,
this emails are outgenerated when a PR is created at github, so I wouldn't
expect the contributor to be subscribed to the list. It's probably better
to comment on the PR at github.
Benedikt
2014-09-30 9:55 GMT+02:00 luc :
> Hi Ole,
>
> Le 2014-09-30 02:09, oleersoy a écrit :
>
>> GitHub
Hi Ole,
Le 2014-09-30 02:09, oleersoy a écrit :
GitHub user oleersoy opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/commons-math/pull/4
Updated the example documentation for the GaussianCurveFitte
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull ht
GitHub user oleersoy opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/commons-math/pull/4
Updated the example documentation for the GaussianCurveFitte
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/oleersoy/commons-math trunk
A
GitHub user lehvolk opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/commons-math/pull/3
implementation of Gumbel, Laplace, Logistic and Nakagami distribution
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/lehvolk/commons-math t
Github user wardev closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/commons-math/pull/2
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
Using https://github.com/apache/commons-math/pull/2.diff and `patch -p1
< 2.diff` worked for me. (On top of svn r1517789)
I've also attached the modified files to
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-1026
Regards,
Evan
On Tue 27 Aug 2013 12:35:48 PM EDT, Gilles wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Aug 20
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 08:40:25 -0700, Ted Dunning wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 7:41 AM, Gilles
wrote:
The patch does not apply cleanly (special options needed to handle
output from git?).
Try different prefix levels. The -p0 option is commonly helpful.
I did that too. It didn't work.
Gi
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 7:41 AM, Gilles wrote:
> The patch does not apply cleanly (special options needed to handle
> output from git?).
>
Try different prefix levels. The -p0 option is commonly helpful.
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 14:19:58 + (UTC), wardev wrote:
GitHub user wardev opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/commons-math/pull/2
Two implementations of least squares in separeate packages.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pul
GitHub user wardev opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/commons-math/pull/2
Two implementations of least squares in separeate packages.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/wardev/commons-math merged
Alter
GitHub user wardev opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/commons-math/pull/1
Separate optimization problem from algorithm in the least squares package
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/wardev/commons-math
33 matches
Mail list logo
