systemml-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Niketan Pansare" <npan...@us.ibm.com>
Subject Re: Starting a SystemML 0.9 release
Date Fri, 15 Jan 2016 19:56:24 GMT

Hi all,

As FYI, I ran some performance experiments this week and the release
SystemML 0.9 looks good to me :)

Thanks,

Niketan Pansare
IBM Almaden Research Center
E-mail: npansar At us.ibm.com
http://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/view.php?person=us-npansar



From:	Mike Dusenberry <dusenberrymw@gmail.com>
To:	dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org
Date:	01/14/2016 06:49 PM
Subject:	Re: Starting a SystemML 0.9 release



The DML Language Reference would be great to have as well.

Also, in general, I think we should only have the Javadocs for end-user
facing code, such MLContext, rather than for any deep internals that a user
is not going to interact with.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 6:26 PM Luciano Resende <luckbr1975@gmail.com>
wrote:

> What should be the minimum documentation to add to the release
distribution
> ?
>
> Currently we have :
> docs/README.txt
> docs/SysteML_Algorithms_Reference.pdf
>
> I was planning to add the javadocs as well.
>
> But I still think we have much more available in trunk that we could
add...
>
> Suggestions are welcome...
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Luciano Resende <luckbr1975@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Also, for fixed jiras, I did the following query :
> >
> >
> >
>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SYSTEMML-376?jql=project%20%3D%20SYSTEMML%20AND%20status%20in%20%28Resolved%2C%20Closed%29%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%202015-10-27

> >
> > And was wondering if we could all move this to 0.9 release.
> >
> > Could someone please help me verify.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Luciano Resende
<luckbr1975@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Matthias Boehm <mboehm@us.ibm.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> great - thanks everybody. Let's get these two fixes in and close the
> >>> release. Until that point, please no new features. The version number
> 0.9
> >>> is fine with me since it's not really a pure maintenance release as
> many
> >>> new features went in too. Down the road, however, we need to think
> about
> >>> release branches.
> >>>
> >> We can create release branches now, or from the tag when we need a
0.9.1
> >> for example. As we are not a large project with tens of prs coming
very
> >> quick, I would recommend to create the branch as needed for minor
> releases.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Luciano Resende
> >> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> >> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> >> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Luciano Resende
> > http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> > http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> > http://lresende.blogspot.com/
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
--
Mike Dusenberry
GitHub: github.com/dusenberrymw
LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/mikedusenberry

Sent from my iPhone.


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