commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Luc Maisonobe <Luc.Maison...@free.fr>
Subject [math] getting changes included into commons-math (was Re: Home for the colt fork)
Date Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:48:20 GMT
Ted Dunning a écrit :
> Actually, the reason that we have Colt in Mahout is it has proven impossible
> to get changes into commons math.  We really, really wanted to use commons
> math rather than have our own linear algebra package, but it just proved
> impossible and we didn't want to wait forever.

If you really, really wants to use commons math and want changes to be
included, contribute them.

I think the only change that was proposed and not done because of lack
of consensus was the inclusion of MTJ (and I don't consider the
discussion closed on that topic either, so it may still happen some
day). All the other changes that are desired are simply lacking someone
to do the work. There were proposals to extend the linear algebra API,
proposals to add more support for sparse matrices, proposals to get
partial decomposition ... But sparse contributions (pun intended).

I try to do what I can, but as you have probably seen have been rather
silent since 2.0 release. For my part, I really, really need help. I
would like to fix the problems in the eigen decomposition and SVD but
need a good kick to get on it, and having only requests and no help is
not really motivating.

Luc

> 
> If that problem were solved, then it would be great to depend on commons
> math.  If that problem isn't solved, then there is no way to depend on
> commons math.
> 
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 6:19 AM, Benson Margulies <bimargulies@gmail.com>wrote:
> 
>> We can't possibly have a dependency on Mahout in the long term. Either
>> we all go shares on code in some other piece of commons, or we end up
>> with two forks, which would be sad.
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:33 AM, James Carman <james@carmanconsulting.com>
>> wrote:
>>> I wouldn't like to see a dependency on mahout code in a "commons"
>>> library.  That seems kind of backwards.  If Mahout wants to offload
>>> this stuff, we can move it into a library in commons (which is
>>> typically how stuff used to happen in Jakarta).
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:18 AM, Benson Margulies <bimargulies@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>> Mahout now has a fork of a portion of the 'category A' portion of the
>>>> CERN colt library forked. The Mahout fork is, of course, in the Mahout
>>>> tree under a Mahout Java package and Maven triple.
>>>>
>>>> I want to use the collections classes from Mahout as the core to a new
>>>> set of commons-primitives classes that do the useful things that GNU
>>>> Trove does.
>>>>
>>>> The classes I want to start from depend on the classes that are in the
>>>> Mahout fork.
>>>>
>>>> As a temporary expedient, I can depend on their there. However, I
>>>> submit that it would be more better if the mathematical code were in
>>>> commons-math. Was this option explored?
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
> 
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message