We can't possibly have a dependency on Mahout in the long term. Either we all go shares on code in some other piece of commons, or we end up with two forks, which would be sad.
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:33 AM, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote: > I wouldn't like to see a dependency on mahout code in a "commons" > library. That seems kind of backwards. If Mahout wants to offload > this stuff, we can move it into a library in commons (which is > typically how stuff used to happen in Jakarta). > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:18 AM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> Mahout now has a fork of a portion of the 'category A' portion of the >> CERN colt library forked. The Mahout fork is, of course, in the Mahout >> tree under a Mahout Java package and Maven triple. >> >> I want to use the collections classes from Mahout as the core to a new >> set of commons-primitives classes that do the useful things that GNU >> Trove does. >> >> The classes I want to start from depend on the classes that are in the >> Mahout fork. >> >> As a temporary expedient, I can depend on their there. However, I >> submit that it would be more better if the mathematical code were in >> commons-math. Was this option explored? >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
