Yes: will you have cycles to do it? 2016-09-12 9:09 GMT-07:00 Nick Pentreath <nick.pentre...@gmail.com>:
> Never actually got around to doing this - do folks still think it > worthwhile? > > On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 at 00:10 Joseph Bradley <jos...@databricks.com> wrote: > >> Sounds good to me. I'd request we be strict during this process about >> requiring *no* changes to the example itself, which will make review easier. >> >> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Bryan Cutler <cutl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> +1, adding some organization would make it easier for people to find a >>> specific example >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 11:52 PM, Yanbo Liang <yblia...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> This sounds good to me, and it will make ML examples more neatly. >>>> >>>> 2016-04-14 5:28 GMT-07:00 Nick Pentreath <nick.pentre...@gmail.com>: >>>> >>>>> Hey Spark devs >>>>> >>>>> I noticed that we now have a large number of examples for ML & MLlib >>>>> in the examples project - 57 for ML and 67 for MLLIB to be precise. This >>>>> is >>>>> bound to get larger as we add features (though I know there are some PRs >>>>> to >>>>> clean up duplicated examples). >>>>> >>>>> What do you think about organizing them into packages to match the use >>>>> case and the structure of the code base? e.g. >>>>> >>>>> org.apache.spark.examples.ml.recommendation >>>>> >>>>> org.apache.spark.examples.ml.feature >>>>> >>>>> and so on... >>>>> >>>>> Is it worth doing? The doc pages with include_example would need >>>>> updating, and the run_example script input would just need to change the >>>>> package slightly. Did I miss any potential issue? >>>>> >>>>> N >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>
