commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Sterijevski <gsterijev...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [math] Monitoring iterative algorithms
Date Tue, 09 Aug 2011 23:26:02 GMT
I was not aware that someone has codified this. The "Rules for
Revolutionaries" is very very good. There is an elegant order out of
disorder theme that permeates it.  Thank you.  -Greg

On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Mark Thomas <markt@apache.org> wrote:

> On 09/08/2011 18:50, Greg Sterijevski wrote:
> > I think you hit the nail on the head with the comment:
> >
> > "... but also the time to
> > experiment. Only the latter will be able to tell if the design is good.
> > And this must take time so that all the potential pitfalls can be ..."
> >
> > Maybe this is chumming the water with more flotsam and jetsam, but a lot
> of
> > the issues that arise in working out the best design ultimately revert to
> > trying out a bunch of deadends [design by monte carlo ;)] The discussion
> on
> > the list [from my rather limited history] seems to try to foresee all
> > possible drawbacks with a design. This inevitably devolves into heated
> > discussion and diminishing progress.
> >
> > Would it be possible to fork the trunk of the source tree to an
> > "experimental branch"?
>
> The idea has been around almost as long as the ASF has:
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/learn/rules-for-revolutionaries.html
>
> Mark
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message