Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:26:33 +0100
From: Gilles Sadowski <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org>
To: dev@commons.apache.org
Subject: Re: [math] 2.1 Release plan
Message-ID: <20100311162633.GB9686@dusk.harfang.homelinux.org>
Mail-Followup-To: dev@commons.apache.org
References: 
 <867611954.7530901268116617634.JavaMail.root@spooler6-g27.priv.proxad.net>
 <4B964E37.5090207@gmail.com>
 <4B9912C4.6090408@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4B9912C4.6090408@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
X-DCC-scarlet.be-Metrics: sif 20002; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1

Hi.

> [...]  OLS regression (350 - good catch!) also
> obviously needs to be fixed.  Thanks to all for testing.

There is indeed a difference from what CM 2.0 computed but maybe that it is
not a problem after all, and is just to be expected from the implementation
change: some failing tests compare values produced by CM 2.0 to values
produced by the current code allowing a tolerance of 1e-13. When setting the
tolerance to 1e-12, the tests pass. Those tests cannot prove that the values
from CM 2.0 were "better" than the current ones.

Looking into the issue with Dimitri, the problem initially referred to in
MATH-350 may in fact be related to the user's code. I'm waiting for her
feedback in order to write some (possibly final) comments on JIRA.


Best,
Gilles

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