Hello.
>
> James, it's good that you bring this up here. This is something I've
> been
> thinking about lately.
>
> I agree that the mathematical knowledge that seems to be necessary to
> dig
> into [MATH] goes beyond what you learn in Computer Science courses at
> university. I usually skip discussions about math but they don't
> bother me
> or anything (like Luc has feared).
>
> Several people have expressed that there have been valuable
> contributions
> on design related decisions from people without a mathematical
> background.
> I'm always open for some design related chatter but I find it hard to
> filter those messages. Maybe an additional tag would help here?
> Something
> to tell me, that the discussion is not related to mathematical theory
> like
> [MATH][DESIGN] or [MATH][API] or something like that?
It's rarely clearcut. Most often, API changes or new DESIGNs are
derived from
1. how one sees the mathematical field to be modelled
2. how extensive this model is going to be
3. how much of the domain is already modelled
4. how strongly we want to maintain compatibility
>
> To cut a long story short: If [MATH] wants to stay here, let it stay
> here.
> :)
Thanks for the hospitality,[1]
Gilles
[1] Although, as I pointed out several times, we should always
take into account that CM is on several counts fairly
different from all the other Commons projects.
The most important aspect here is the "code maturity" level.

To unsubscribe, email: devunsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, email: devhelp@commons.apache.org
