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 clear-cut. 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, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
