Github user MLnick commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/16078
@AnthonyTruchet I think in this case it was just confusing to have many PRs
opened against the issue. One option is to either adjust the existing PR with
changes (so that only one PR is open).
Github user AnthonyTruchet commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/16078
In order to reduce the mess around multiple PRs I'll close this one and
rebase the change in #16037 as you requested.
What is the right way,convenient for you, to share a proposal
Github user AnthonyTruchet commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/16078
It is necessary to address it in L-BFGS at least. We propose a solution in
core which can be legitimately rejected as not relevant for core. And two
solutions in MLlib, one provide for a
Github user srowen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/16078
This is getting a bit out of hand, with 6 pull requests now. To be clear, I
do not think we should merge this change. It's not necessary to address the
problem.
---
If your project is set up for
Github user AmplabJenkins commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/16078
Can one of the admins verify this patch?
---
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
