Hi,
I'm resending this mail to also include the users list. To wrap up: We
currently have a discussion whether our frequent pattern mining package
should stay in the codebase. The original author suggested to remove the
original implementation and maybe retain the FPGrowth2 implementation.
what is the alternative and if one would still want to use the frequent
pattern mining code in the future, how
would this be possible otherwise?
Thanks
Michael
Am 28.04.14 08:19, schrieb Sebastian Schelter:
Hi,
I'm resending this mail to also include the users list. To wrap up: We
currently
Hi Michael,
the problem is that currently nodoby is maintaining the fpgrowth code
anymore or working on documentation for it, that's why we consider it to
be a candidate for removal. I don't see much value in keeping algorithms
in the codebase if nobody is maintaining them, answering
Would someone be willing to open a jira ticket for this issue and fix
the problem?
--sebastian
On 04/28/2014 01:05 AM, Ted Dunning wrote:
Mathjax is both static content and server.
There is an FAQ about this https problem. I think that part of the issue
is that they don't use the same URL
Hi Sebastian
Thanks for your reply. I agree that makes sense.
I am not familiar enough with the codebase of Mahout, but generally
speaking it might make sense to modularize it somehow, such that
algorithms like the fpgrowth code could be downloaded separately
independent of the core codebase.
+100 to purging this from the codebase. This stuff uses the old MR api and
would have to be upgraded not to mention that this was removed from 0.9 and
was restored only because one user wanted it who promised to maintain it
and has not been heard from.
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 2:19 AM,
I am slammed today, but will leave this email marked for action. After
tomorrow's talks, I may have time.
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Sebastian Schelter s...@apache.org wrote:
Would someone be willing to open a jira ticket for this issue and fix the
problem?
--sebastian
On
One thought is to extract the code, publish on github with warnings about
no support. Then if there are requests, we can point them to the GH
archive and tell them to go for it.
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Suneel Marthi smar...@apache.org wrote:
+100 to purging this from the codebase.
I'm very much in favor of this idea.
On 04/28/2014 10:52 AM, Ted Dunning wrote:
One thought is to extract the code, publish on github with warnings about
no support. Then if there are requests, we can point them to the GH
archive and tell them to go for it.
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 10:03
