Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
From: Rob Tompkins <chtompki@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\))
Subject: Re: [Math] Not releasing 3.X (Was: Linear Programming in Math [...])
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 09:45:15 -0500
References: <CACSOW2hVNO4Z_P3VbbnUV5sWbORvazvLXXmST2+t1G1Ds80e-w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3FD47587-4297-47B0-92D0-B8FA8A9556A9@gmail.com>
 <aa01bd8ea2d096e1a4a26d7a60c3dd08@scarlet.be>
To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <aa01bd8ea2d096e1a4a26d7a60c3dd08@scarlet.be>
Message-Id: <BD4C50D3-C60A-4C63-82A2-827C6E60A716@gmail.com>
archived-at: Tue, 02 Jan 2018 14:45:25 -0000

Ok. Was just trying to make a suggestion to think about shooting for =
incremental changes specifically with [math] to go along with all of the =
good work with the other mathematical projects.

-Rob

> On Jan 2, 2018, at 5:43 AM, Gilles <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org> =
wrote:
>=20
> Hello.
>=20
> On Mon, 1 Jan 2018 19:27:00 -0500, Rob Tompkins wrote:
>>> On Jan 1, 2018, at 7:08 PM, Bill Igoe <billigoe@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>=20
>>> Hi Gang,
>>>=20
>>> I noted a recent exchange on OLS regarding Math Commons.  Thus far I =
find
>>> the Math Commons working flawlessly.  I am also working on a project =
for
>>> pure real time financial optimization using the Linear Programming
>>> algorithm of Math commons.  I designed my code to flip between the =
QSOPT
>>> package and the Math common LP algo to check the robustness and =
consistency
>>> of  results.   I get exactly same answers in both and that LP is =
using over
>>> 2000 variables and 3000 constraints!
>>=20
>> Many thanks for the encouragement.
>>=20
>> All - any thoughts on trying to do a release on [math] is the 3.X
>> branch stable?
>=20
> This branch is unsupported; making a new release based on it will
> send the wrong signal and is likely to generate bug reports already
> filed on "master" (with "Fix version" set to 4.0), and sometimes
> fixed there (or in "RNG" or in "Numbers").
>=20
> You'd basically scratch almost 3 years of continuous work:
> ---CUT---
> commit e4e1ac23c734f65686be4bc0e503f82f941afd4d
> Author: Thomas Neidhart <thomas.neidhart@gmail.com>
> Date:   Mon Feb 16 23:37:23 2015 +0100
>=20
>    Update for next development iteration: commons-math4
> ---CUT---
>=20
>> Are there any small bug fixes we can do to make small
>> incremental changes and release those?
>=20
> Any time spent on back-porting fixes from "master" will be better
> used for advancing towards the release of "Commons Numbers", and
> other components with supported (reviewed and fixed) codes,
> according to the "plan" (cf. ML archive for details).
> Help welcome.
>=20
>>=20
>> -Rob
>>=20
>>>=20
>>> Keep up the good work and I am looking forward to the 'split' =
between
>>> Commons Math and Statistics.
>=20
> As outlined in another thread, high-level functionalities with
> positive feedback, like the one referred to here, can be ported
> to a new component, with low-level supporting codes (but possibly
> buggy) being hidden in "internal" packages until they are ported
> (or released) themselves.
> Comments, and help with experimenting, on this approach welcome.
> E.g. the contents of "o.a.c.m.stat.regression" would become a
> module of "Commons Stat".
>=20
>>>=20
>>> Cheers to you all and have a great 2018
>=20
> Thanks and best regards,
> Gilles
>=20
>>>=20
>>> Bill Igoe
>=20
>=20
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>=20


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