commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Luc Maisonobe <>
Subject Re: [math] 2.1 Release plan
Date Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:54:52 GMT
Phil Steitz a écrit :
> Phil Steitz wrote:
>> Phil Steitz wrote:
>>> wrote:
>>>> ----- "Phil Steitz (JIRA)" <> a écrit :
>>>>> [
>>>>> ]
>>>>> Phil Steitz resolved MATH-282.
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>     Resolution: Fixed
>>>> Great !
>>>> With this fix, there are no pending issues for 2.1. Gilles is working on
two unscheduled issues.
>>>> I suggest once he has committed the fixes, we can go ahead to release 2.1.
>>>> Any thoughts about this ?
>>> First, let me volunteer to RM.  I will take the opportunity to
>>> update the releasing docs as I go, so it will be easier for others
>>> to do this in the future.
>>> Second, we should decide on the "unscheduled" issues - all should be
>>> assigned a fix version or closed as WONTFIX, INVALID, INCOMPLETE,
>>> etc.  Any that are incomplete, we can add a comment requesting that
>>> they be reopened if and when more info becomes available.
>>> Third, I would like to squeeze in 330, 331, 332.  The patch in 332
>>> almost resolves all three of these.  All that is needed are test
>>> cases and I have started working on these.  If I run into problems,
>>> I will mark these issues as 2.2.  I will fish or cut bait on this
>>> today.
>> I am still working on this. I ran into a few problems with the
>> density implementations, but should be able to fix and complete
>> tests in the next couple of days.  Would appreciate others weighing
>> in on uncategorized issues.  OLS regression (350 - good catch!) also
>> obviously needs to be fixed.  Thanks to all for testing.
>> Phil
>>> Finally, we should review the Clirr report and verify that @since
>>> tags have been added for anything new since 2.0.  I know I just
>>> missed a couple of them.
> I am almost done now with MATH-330-332 (add densities for all
> continuous distributions).  I took a stab at categorizing the
> uncategorized issues.  I put some of them at 2.1, meaning we need to
> resolve them prior to release.  Patches / opinions that it is OK to
> push some of them out welcome.

Concerning MATH-321, the partial fix I proposed has been withdrawn by
the complete rewrite of SVD.
This partial fix also was not considered mathematically sound by Dimitri
since the dimensions of the matrices did not match complete SVD. Well,
this was in fact desired as MATH-321 explicitly asks for non-full SVD.

So I'm not sure anymore what we need to do. If we follow Dimitri's
rationale, we should close this as WON'T FIX. If we decide to fix it, I
think we should postpone it to after 2.1 to have time to decide how we
solve it. SVD has already been vastly improved by Dimitri's work, so I
would really much like to see it published now.

Dim, what do you think about this ?


> Phil
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message