Hi Ralph.
On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 10:55:49 -0700, Ralph Goers wrote:
Gilles,
What is your vision on where things should end up? Can you identify
what new commons sub-projects we will have? If it is just 3 or 4 I
have no problem with that.
We have
* RNG
We will have
* Numbers
We might have
* SigProc
* Clustering
But if we are going to have 10 sub-projects
then I really feel like it should be done as:
A: Commons Math with Commons Math RNG, Commons Math Numbers, Commons
Math XXX, etc.
Do you mean a modularized "Commons Math"?
If so, my opinion is that it is not feasible at this point.
B: Math TLP with RNG, Numbers, XXX, etc.
Also not feasible at this point:
1. There are too few developers to support all of the code in
"Commons Math", and I've the feeling that there won't be enough
volunteers to help this TLP. [cf. James Carman's offer that had
been turned down by the PMC.]
2. The amount of code that is supported by the current team is so
small that "Commons" is the perfect home for these few new
components.
I have a few reasons for feeling this way:
1. Although you seem to disagree, these components do seem to be
related in that they all have something to do with Mathematical
concepts.
It's hard to deny that, but the same goes for other components
that don't seem to trouble anyone (RDF, Compress, Crypto, Functor).
2. It is easier for users to find if they are all grouped together.
By the same token, why not group all of "Commons" in a single
maven project? Doesn't make sense? Then it also does not make
sense to group things under the sole "math" category: it's just
too broad and does not help users discover whether there is
something fit for them.
That said, all of this is just housekeeping and can be addressed at
almost any time.
Indeed.
As Ray also pointed out: we can decide later to group tools
if it would make sense from a management POV.
If you want to create a new Commons component you
can create a new git repo any time you want to.
Thanks.
The only time you
really need to ask for permission from the PMC is when you want to
integrate it into the Commons home page.
Obviously, this work aims at that. [Otherwise, why bother?]
So, what does the PMC say?
Of course, you should seek
consensus from your fellow Math developers but if you make a repo and
populate it I am sure that others will go along if they can see that
what you have done is a good idea.
That's what I did with "Commons RNG".
I keep getting the impression that you believe people are standing in
your way. They aren’t. If you start a discussion you should expect
people to weigh in. Just because they disagree doesn’t mean they are
going to stop you. But if you don’t listen to their opinion don’t
expect to get much help either.
Let's not reverse the roles, please?
Did you read that thread:
http://markmail.org/message/uiljlf63uucnfyy2
?
Before I ended up being insulted, I helped with "Commons Math"
for an _extended_ period of time despite my long time disagreement
with the management of the codebase.
I spent considerable time doing "consensus" things even when my
opinion had been that they were useless (and proven so, later on).
So, not only did I listen, but I did much more than "listen"...
Gilles
Ralph
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
