Try the other interpreter, -Pr to build. If there are dependency issues it will
tell you during the build process.
> On May 11, 2016, at 10:54 AM, Ethan X wrote:
>
> Thank you both for your comments. My bad for not following up sooner. The
> replies didn't show up in my mailbox for some reason.
nsole as well.
>
> I see a single file in zeppelin\logs zeppelin--7ed5948b0d52.log and attached
> the same. It doesn't contain any errors. Do you want me to enable some logs
> and rerun the paragraph?
>
> Thanks,
> Sam.
>
>> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 8:42 PM, Amos E
Sam - it should run fine in docker, but if you are running a Linux docker on
Windows, I have heard that sometimes the environment can become flaky.
What you're seeing sounds like spark is failing to start.
You should be able to get Zeppelin to output a log for the entire spark
interpreter grou
Junggi you can use it now by installing from source from the git. There are
instructions there.
> On Apr 21, 2016, at 8:06 AM, Junggi Yang wrote:
>
> Thank you for creating a apche zeppelin.
>
> I like to use a zeppelin r interpreter.
>
> When completed, the development of applied R interpret
Ankur -
You do have to install R, otherwise the interpreter won't be able to install
itself. You should also install knitr; this isn't strictly necessary, and you
probably already have it installed. The one thing I know has to be installed
manually, is the `repr` package. There are instruct
A few suggestions for the roadmap:
1. Increase unit test coverage. I suggest we set thresholds -- say, 70% for
0.6, 85% for 0.7, and aim for 95% before 1.0.
2. Language support. Right now, interpreters essentially have to be written
in Java, or at least have java wrappers. This is because th
+1
I can't think of any reason why anyone using a version of Spark before 1.3
would use Zeppelin. And versions before 1.4 are pretty unlikely as well.
Getting rid of 1.1 and 1.2 - and even 1.3 - would make everyone's lives
easier.
Spark 2.0 is coming out soon, so if we can clear out some of tho
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#the-review-process
> > > >
> > > > It's not ready while PPMC really made no +1 vote for 208 for last
> > couple
> > > of
> > > > months while it's breaking C
, 2016 at 1:33 AM, Amos Elberg wrote:
> Alex - there are no technical things blocking 208.
>
> You posted a message on 208 that Tom's proposal was not technically
> possible.
>
> Do we have to get the community to vote on this *again*?
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 1:13 AM
e Tom's proposal and am looking forward particular action items and
> people volunteering on technical help with it.
> Each message in this thread leaves me personally less time to do so.
>
> 1. https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/208
>
> --
> Alex
>
>
th
> > > > about it, I started this discussion to clear up any question about
> the
> > > > sense of the community.
> > > >
> > > > This is the apache way. You have said many times, "community before
> > code."
> > > >
ou explain why do you think people disagree on this position?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >moon
> >
> >[1]
> >
> http://apache-zeppelin-incubating-dev-mailing-list.75694.x6.nabble.com/R-interpreter-in-Zeppelin-further-steps-tp6967.html
> >
> >On Tue, Mar 29, 20
before
> code."
> >
> > How many more people do you need to hear from? How many more discussion
> > threads saying the same thing do you need to see?
> >
> > > On Mar 29, 2016, at 2:50 PM, moon soo Lee wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> >> I am looking forward to see 208 merged, *soon* please. From my
> tests
> > it
> > > >> seems that this should be the priority.
> > > >>
> > > >> I think 702 has merits (but I’ve used it less) and deserves to be
> > merged
>
I am saddened to have to start this thread *again*. While I thought we had
reached consensus on this, several times over, apparently some people
disagree. I hope this will be the last time.
With this thread, I am asking the community to reach consensus (1) That 208
should be merged this week, wi
An issue has come up regarding PR 789 that I feel should be a community
discussion.
The PR takes configuration preferences, and converts them into environment
variables, in particular for VMs launched as independent processes. It is
not requested functionality and nothing else depends on it.
I d
>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Jeff Steinmetz
> > >> Principal Architect
> > >> Akili Interactive
> > >> www.akiliinteractive.com <http://www.akiliinteractive.com/>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >&g
t; Sooner we reach a consensus on the topic - sooner we can make further
> progress.
>
> --
> Alex
>
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Amos Elberg wrote:
> > Alex - What are we still debating at this point?
> >
> > I'm starting to feel like Charlie Br
Alex - What are we still debating at this point?
I'm starting to feel like Charlie Brown with the football here.
The PR was submitted in August and originally reviewed at the beginning of
September.
In, I think, early December, it was then extensively reviewed and
discussed. I made a few request
I want to explain the issue that @enzo raises regarding htmlwidgets.
Both R interpreters support a variety of html widgets, because they use the
"knitr" package, which acts as a bridge for many interactive vis packages.
Neither, however, supports the "htmlwidgets" R package. The reason is tha
But
> let's keep in mind that other people is also free to have different
> opinion.
>
> With this respect, i'll be happy to continue the discussion.
>
> Thanks,
> moon
>
> On 2016년 2월 6일 (토) at 오전 11:58 Amos Elberg wrote:
>
> > Moon - Are you now
Roman - I'm only seeing this after the last email I sent. I would not
have sent it if I'd seen this.
I agree to your call for a "time out."
Thank you for your involvement.
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 8:45 PM, Roman Shaposhnik
wrote:
> Amos, Moon, Felix,
>
> I would like to call a time out on this
I, but basically you can do it yourself, too. Nothing stops
> it.
>
> Also zeppelin community did not organized that seattle meetup last year and
> i had been invited. So i should say 3rd party meetup.
>
> Hope this help you look project in a different view.
>
> Thanks,
>
d I urge you to reconsider your
> approach. I am not going to reply or debate with you any further on email
> or any electronic medium. And you don't need to send me more SMS or call,
> you have been blocked.
> Felix
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 4:
e.
> >
> >
> > I don't see anyone in the community try to steal your work. You
> > always
> > pointing Felix but he said he used his own work.
> >
> > Zeppelin community is not judging what happened in a 3rd party
> > meetup.
> >
> &g
esentation for the meetup. That's better instead of
> complaining in graduation discussion thread.
>
> Best,
> moon
>
> On 2016년 2월 6일 (토) at 오전 7:44 Amos Elberg
> wrote:
>
> > The topic here is supposed to be an open, honest, objective
> > ev
ord of dishonesty.
> > > CS50All "important" discussions happen asynchronously in written
> > > form on the project's main communications channel. Offline, face
-> > > to-face or private discussions that affect the project are also
> > > docume
Since subtlety has not worked, I will now be blunter.
The reason PR 208 has been delayed since August is that Felix Cheung
demanded that I credit him as a co-author even though he hadn't done
any work.
When I refused, Felix privately contacted Moon, who is his friend, and
claimed the PR conta
Alex -
I hestitate to respond at all since recently when a pmc member has
called for a "vote" it seems more that the purpose is to ratify
something that a few people have already privately agreed on.
But -- the last time Zeppelin applied for graduation was a month ago.
What happened then?
29 matches
Mail list logo
