Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/60912/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user shivaram commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Cool. Thanks - LGTM. Merging this to master, branch-2.0
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Merged build finished. Test PASSed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
**[Test build #60912 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/60912/consoleFull)**
for PR 13109 at commit
Github user mengxr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-16090 to follow up.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your
Github user mengxr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Yes, we should merge this PR first and discuss the grouping later.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
**[Test build #60912 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/60912/consoleFull)**
for PR 13109 at commit
Github user felixcheung commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Right @shivaram @mengxr I agree it would be nicer to put `predict`,
`summary` or even `write.ml` to their corresponding mllib methods.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to
Github user shivaram commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Jenkins, retest this please
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and
Github user shivaram commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
@mengxr @felixcheung Can we open a new issue of the form `Separate out rd
files for SparkR functions` ? We can then make a list there of everything thats
sharing a rd file right now and see what
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
**[Test build #60910 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/60910/consoleFull)**
for PR 13109 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/60910/
Test FAILed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Merged build finished. Test FAILed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user mengxr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Methods documented in `colSums` share the same parameters and each was only
documented once. Roxygen2 supports that if each param doc only appears once in
the comment. That grouping looks okay to
Github user shivaram commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
@mengxr Yes - this is true and in #13798 we are making a few more of the
methods into individual Rd files. At a high level there is a tradition in R to
group together similar methods
Github user shivaram commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
LGTM. This version looks good to me. Thanks for iterating on this. Will
wait for Jenkins and then merge.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user mengxr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
I just checked the generated R doc and I felt that we shouldn't group many
methods together. For example, in this PR, the `DESCRIPTION` section looks okay
because we used `crosstab - ...` and
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
**[Test build #60910 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/60910/consoleFull)**
for PR 13109 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/60908/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Merged build finished. Test PASSed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
**[Test build #60908 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/60908/consoleFull)**
for PR 13109 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/60905/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
**[Test build #60908 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/60908/consoleFull)**
for PR 13109 at commit
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Merged build finished. Test PASSed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
**[Test build #60905 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/60905/consoleFull)**
for PR 13109 at commit
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Yes. Indeed, we had better keep each function on own RD generally.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your
Github user felixcheung commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
That's intentional - covar_pop has a separate page.
cov == covar_samp
putting covar_pop on the same rd would have 2 different descriptions here.
(I think we really should avoid putting
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
In line 333 of `functions.R`, `@rdname covar_pop` -> `@rdname cov`?
```
#' covar_pop
#'
#' Compute the population covariance between two expressions.
#'
#' @rdname
Github user felixcheung commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
It's nasty! ð
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes
Github user dongjoon-hyun commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Oh, the root cause exists in `generics.R`. Nice catch!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
**[Test build #60905 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/60905/consoleFull)**
for PR 13109 at commit
Github user shivaram commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
cc @dongjoon-hyun
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so,
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/60897/
Test PASSed.
---
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Merged build finished. Test PASSed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
**[Test build #60897 has
finished](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/60897/consoleFull)**
for PR 13109 at commit
Github user SparkQA commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
**[Test build #60897 has
started](https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/60897/consoleFull)**
for PR 13109 at commit
Github user felixcheung commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
Updated `cov`, `corr` into their rd page and kept others.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does
Github user felixcheung commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
I think it does. I will try to update this today.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have
Github user shivaram commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13109
@felixcheung Is this PR still relevant ?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
39 matches
Mail list logo
