I’ll be nice an summarize. Giles started two vote threads. The first was
polluted with discussion and eventually closed. The second has not passed and
is effectively dead but Giles hasn’t closed the vote.
So nothing has been approved.
Ralph
> On May 14, 2021, at 5:48 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
Are seriously asking someone else to read through 40 emails and summarize
for you? Perhaps part of your contribution might be to do this yourself?
Gary
On Fri, May 14, 2021, 08:15 Avijit Basak wrote:
> Hi All
>
> This has been a long mail thread. It will be really helpful if
> anyone
Hi All
This has been a long mail thread. It will be really helpful if
anyone can summarize the decisions.
Is the proposal of developing the new machine learning component
approved?
If the team repository is not provided is there any way to go ahead?
Waiting for a
On Thu, 6 May 2021 at 21:13, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> It is true that there much less friction these days to get a repository
> going with GitHub, GitLab, and BitBucket, but, for now, the Commons Sandbox
> is still available. If we want to do away with the sandbox, then let's
> talk about that
It is true that there much less friction these days to get a repository
going with GitHub, GitLab, and BitBucket, but, for now, the Commons Sandbox
is still available. If we want to do away with the sandbox, then let's
talk about that separately.
Gary
On Thu, May 6, 2021, 11:26 Ralph Goers
Le jeu. 6 mai 2021 à 20:29, Oliver Heger
a écrit :
>
>
>
> Am 05.05.21 um 21:54 schrieb Gilles Sadowski:
> > Le mer. 5 mai 2021 à 20:33, Oliver Heger
> > a écrit :
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Am 05.05.21 um 20:26 schrieb Gilles Sadowski:
> >>> Le mer. 5 mai 2021 à 18:57, Gary Gregory a écrit
> >>> :
>
Am 05.05.21 um 21:54 schrieb Gilles Sadowski:
Le mer. 5 mai 2021 à 20:33, Oliver Heger
a écrit :
Am 05.05.21 um 20:26 schrieb Gilles Sadowski:
Le mer. 5 mai 2021 à 18:57, Gary Gregory a écrit :
IMO the lack of +1s shows the lack of appetite to manage another component
That's
> > [...]
> >>
> >> So a procedural vote requires a majority.
> >
> > There is a small majority (irrespective of the binding vs non-binding
> > categories).
>
> In votes ONLY PMC member votes are counted. Other votes are
> advisory. PMC members should take those votes into account
> when voting.
> On May 6, 2021, at 3:04 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>
>> It looks like you didn’t read the page.
>
> I did, of course. And my interpretation differs.
>
>> For clarity I am copying it here
>>
>> "Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule unless
>>
>> otherwise
> On May 6, 2021, at 8:06 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> What about the Commons Sandox? Would that be a good place to start?
>
Emmanuel just sort of proposed doing away with it. As he put it, anyone can
create a
GitHub repo so why does it need to be under the apache user. He hasn’t
What about the Commons Sandox? Would that be a good place to start?
Gary
On Thu, May 6, 2021, 09:37 Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> Le jeu. 6 mai 2021 à 14:48, Emmanuel Bourg a écrit :
> >
> > Le 2021-05-06 13:06, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
> >
> > > It is not nice to decide for others what they may
Le jeu. 6 mai 2021 à 14:48, Emmanuel Bourg a écrit :
>
> Le 2021-05-06 13:06, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
>
> > It is not nice to decide for others what they may need.
>
> It is not nice to suggest I shouldn't voice my opinions.
Your argued opinion is welcome.
In the text which you cut, you
Le 2021-05-06 13:06, Gilles Sadowski a écrit :
It is not nice to decide for others what they may need.
It is not nice to suggest I shouldn't voice my opinions.
It would have been courteous to acknowledge the answers to
your argument against having a dedicated component
I've little
Le jeu. 6 mai 2021 à 02:24, Emmanuel Bourg a écrit :
>
> Le 2021-05-05 20:31, Oliver Heger a écrit :
>
> > What about the sandbox? IIUC, every committer can start a new
> > component there. If then a community forms around this component, it
> > can move to proper (which would then require a
Le jeu. 6 mai 2021 à 07:53, Ralph Goers a écrit :
>
>
> > On May 5, 2021, at 11:13 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> >
> > Le mer. 5 mai 2021 à 17:44, Ralph Goers a
> > écrit :
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On May 5, 2021, at 6:38 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Le mar. 4 mai 2021 à 02:49, Ralph
> On May 5, 2021, at 11:13 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>
> Le mer. 5 mai 2021 à 17:44, Ralph Goers a écrit :
>>
>>
>>
>>> On May 5, 2021, at 6:38 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>>>
>>> Le mar. 4 mai 2021 à 02:49, Ralph Goers a
>>> écrit :
I apologize. I started another thread
Le 2021-05-05 20:31, Oliver Heger a écrit :
What about the sandbox? IIUC, every committer can start a new
component there. If then a community forms around this component, it
can move to proper (which would then require a vote).
With the various source hosting solutions available today we no
Le mer. 5 mai 2021 à 20:33, Oliver Heger
a écrit :
>
>
>
> Am 05.05.21 um 20:26 schrieb Gilles Sadowski:
> > Le mer. 5 mai 2021 à 18:57, Gary Gregory a écrit :
> >>
> >> IMO the lack of +1s shows the lack of appetite to manage another component
> >
> > That's certainly true.
> > And nobody is
Am 05.05.21 um 20:26 schrieb Gilles Sadowski:
Le mer. 5 mai 2021 à 18:57, Gary Gregory a écrit :
IMO the lack of +1s shows the lack of appetite to manage another component
That's certainly true.
And nobody is forced to do anything.
When the other CM spin-offs started, there was only
Le mer. 5 mai 2021 à 18:57, Gary Gregory a écrit :
>
> IMO the lack of +1s shows the lack of appetite to manage another component
That's certainly true.
And nobody is forced to do anything.
When the other CM spin-offs started, there was only _one_ person
willing to do the work.
Gilles
> [...]
Le mer. 5 mai 2021 à 17:44, Ralph Goers a écrit :
>
>
>
> > On May 5, 2021, at 6:38 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> >
> > Le mar. 4 mai 2021 à 02:49, Ralph Goers a
> > écrit :
> >>
> >> I apologize. I started another thread regarding the vote before seeing
> >> this.
> >
> > No problem.
> >
> >>
IMO the lack of +1s shows the lack of appetite to manage another component
that not "common" to "most" Java apps, where I use quotes to understand
that YMMV.
Personally, my plate is full with the current slate of components in which
I participate.
Gary
On Wed, May 5, 2021, 09:38 Gilles Sadowski
> On May 5, 2021, at 6:38 AM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>
> Le mar. 4 mai 2021 à 02:49, Ralph Goers a écrit :
>>
>> I apologize. I started another thread regarding the vote before seeing this.
>
> No problem.
>
>> Maybe that will get more attention?
>
> It doesn't seem so. :-}
>
> IMHO,
Le mar. 4 mai 2021 à 02:49, Ralph Goers a écrit :
>
> I apologize. I started another thread regarding the vote before seeing this.
No problem.
> Maybe that will get more attention?
It doesn't seem so. :-}
IMHO, valid answers have been given to the statements/questions
from people who didn't
I apologize. I started another thread regarding the vote before seeing this.
Maybe that will get more attention?
Ralph
> On May 2, 2021, at 3:59 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
>> [... Discussion about GA data-structures...]
>
> I'd suggest that we finalize the [Vote] before getting
Hello.
Le lun. 3 mai 2021 à 08:53, Avijit Basak a écrit :
>
> Hi
>
> I would like to vote for *commons-ml*.
Wrong thread, again.
Sorry for the nit-picking, but whenever a vote is requested, it is
often the basis of an official decision that must be traceable by
other parties, such as
Hi
I would like to vote for *commons-ml*.
Thanks & Regards
--Avijit Basak
On Mon, 3 May 2021 at 04:29, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> Hi.
>
> > [... Discussion about GA data-structures...]
>
> I'd suggest that we finalize the [Vote] before getting into the
> details...
>
> Currently,
Hi.
> [... Discussion about GA data-structures...]
I'd suggest that we finalize the [Vote] before getting into the
details...
Currently, there have been votes by:
Emmanuel Bourg (-1)
Sebastian Bazley (-0)
Ralph Goers (+0)
Paul King (+1)
So currently, the discussion should be focused on
On Sun, 2 May 2021 at 16:51, Avijit Basak wrote:
> Hi
>
> >>Note: You cannot easily just use java.util.BitSet as you wish to
> have
> access to the underlying long[] to store the chromosome to enable efficient
> crossover.
> --Thanks for pointing this. However, I have considered few
Hi
>>Note: You cannot easily just use java.util.BitSet as you wish to
have
access to the underlying long[] to store the chromosome to enable efficient
crossover.
--Thanks for pointing this. However, I have considered few constraints
while doing the implementation.
1) I extended the
Le ven. 30 avr. 2021 à 17:40, Avijit Basak a écrit :
>
> Hi
>
> >>lot of spurious references to "Commons Numbers"
> --I have only created the basic project structure. Changes
> need to be made. Can anyone from the existing commons team help in doing
> this.
Wel, you should
On Fri, 30 Apr 2021 at 16:40, Avijit Basak wrote:
>
> >> Then some examination of the data-structures is required (a
> binary chromosome is currently stored as a "List").
> -- I have recently done some work on this. Could you please
> check this article and share your
Hi
>>lot of spurious references to "Commons Numbers"
--I have only created the basic project structure. Changes
need to be made. Can anyone from the existing commons team help in doing
this.
>> For sure, populate it with the code extracted from CM's
"genetics"
Le lun. 26 avr. 2021 à 16:18, Avijit Basak a écrit :
>
> Hi
>
> As per previous discussions, I have created a temporary repository
> in GitHub under my personal GitHub Id(avijitbasak). The artifacts have been
> copied from commons-numbers. A preliminary structure has been created for
>
Le lun. 26 avr. 2021 à 17:08, Ralph Goers a écrit :
>
> How many committers will be active for this component?
No less than there were for [RNG], [Numbers] and [Geometry]. ;-)
Those new components have attracted high-quality contributions;
two of the people who provided them have become
Le dim. 25 avr. 2021 à 16:27, sebb a écrit :
>
> I assume this thread is about the possible ML component.
I hesitated with Subject: "The case for *any* Commons component".
> If the code was developed by Commons, I assume it could be used as
> part of Spark.
> However Commons does not currently
How many committers will be active for this component?
Ralph
> On Apr 26, 2021, at 7:17 AM, Avijit Basak wrote:
>
> Hi
>
>As per previous discussions, I have created a temporary repository
> in GitHub under my personal GitHub Id(avijitbasak). The artifacts have been
> copied from
Hi
As per previous discussions, I have created a temporary repository
in GitHub under my personal GitHub Id(avijitbasak). The artifacts have been
copied from commons-numbers. A preliminary structure has been created for
the proposed component.
Please let me know if we want to proceed with
On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 12:27 AM sebb wrote:
>
> I assume this thread is about the possible ML component.
>
> If the code was developed by Commons, I assume it could be used as
> part of Spark.
> However Commons does not currently have many developers who are
> familiar with the field.
> So it
I assume this thread is about the possible ML component.
If the code was developed by Commons, I assume it could be used as
part of Spark.
However Commons does not currently have many developers who are
familiar with the field.
So it would seem to me better to have development done by a project
Le dim. 25 avr. 2021 à 00:32, Paul King a écrit :
>
> Thanks Gilles,
>
> I can provide the same sort of stats across a clustering example
> across commons-math (KMeans) vs Apache Ignite, Apache Spark and
> Rheem/Apache Wayang (incubating) if anyone would find that useful. It
> would no doubt lead
Thanks Gilles,
I can provide the same sort of stats across a clustering example
across commons-math (KMeans) vs Apache Ignite, Apache Spark and
Rheem/Apache Wayang (incubating) if anyone would find that useful. It
would no doubt lead to similar conclusions.
Cheers, Paul.
On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at
42 matches
Mail list logo
