Re: [lang3] Test Fail in Headless Mode (at Least on a Mac)

2010-11-19 Thread Henri Yandell
+1 to make a change; it really irritates on OS X when AWT takes over control of the focus. On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 8:08 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > Hi, > > I'm pretty sure lang3 isn't the only project that is affected, it's just > the first one we've seen it.  "we" ist the Gump project. > > Sande

Re: [math] preparing smooth interface upgrade for users

2010-11-19 Thread Phil Steitz
On Nov 19, 2010, at 9:50 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote: > Le 19/11/2010 16:39, Phil Steitz a écrit : >> On 11/19/10 8:52 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote: >>> Le 17/11/2010 21:08, sebb a écrit : On 17 November 2010 19:53, Luc Maisonobe wrote: > Le 17/11/2010 13:48, Phil Steitz a écrit : >> On

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons NET 2.2 based on RC3

2010-11-19 Thread Niall Pemberton
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: Daniel F. Savarese [mailto:d...@savarese.org] >> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 10:50 >> To: Commons Developers List >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons NET 2.2 based on RC3 >> >> >> In message <02aa127

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons NET 2.2 based on RC3

2010-11-19 Thread Ralph Goers
On Nov 19, 2010, at 12:16 PM, Oliver Heger wrote: >> >> > Just a comment from me because my remark somehow started the whole discussion: > > As I pointed out with my +1 vote I do not see the lack of these jars as a > blocker. > > However, I was a bit surprised that they were missing as it se

RE: [VOTE] Release Commons NET 2.2 based on RC3

2010-11-19 Thread Gary Gregory
> -Original Message- > From: Oliver Heger [mailto:oliver.he...@oliver-heger.de] > Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 12:17 > To: Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons NET 2.2 based on RC3 > > Am 19.11.2010 19:50, schrieb Daniel F. Savarese: > > > > In message<02aa127cd

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons NET 2.2 based on RC3

2010-11-19 Thread Oliver Heger
Am 19.11.2010 19:50, schrieb Daniel F. Savarese: In message<02aa127cd8dcde48bc7d2dfb6c87083a07dda...@nwt-s-mbx2.rocketsoftware. com>, Gary Gregory writes: I do not think we should base decisions like this on a byte count, relative= or not. I like to think of what users do with this stuff. To

Re: [math] CMA-ES optimization algorithm

2010-11-19 Thread Ted Dunning
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 10:10 AM, Gilles Sadowski < gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: > > But seriously, the long running programs in Mahout are almost all > map-reduce > > jobs and there is a fairly good framework for > > progress reporting in Hadoop. This includes normal logging as well as a

RE: [VOTE] Release Commons NET 2.2 based on RC3

2010-11-19 Thread Gary Gregory
> -Original Message- > From: Daniel F. Savarese [mailto:d...@savarese.org] > Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 10:50 > To: Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons NET 2.2 based on RC3 > > > In message <02aa127cd8dcde48bc7d2dfb6c87083a07dda...@nwt-s- > mbx2.rocketsoftwa

Re: [math] CMA-ES optimization algorithm

2010-11-19 Thread Gilles Sadowski
Hi. > > But seriously, the long running programs in Mahout are almost all map-reduce > jobs and there is a fairly good framework for > progress reporting in Hadoop. This includes normal logging as well as a > counter framework that allows code to drive status > counters in parallel out to a stan

Re: [math] preparing smooth interface upgrade for users

2010-11-19 Thread Luc Maisonobe
Le 19/11/2010 16:39, Phil Steitz a écrit : > On 11/19/10 8:52 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote: >> Le 17/11/2010 21:08, sebb a écrit : >>> On 17 November 2010 19:53, Luc Maisonobe wrote: Le 17/11/2010 13:48, Phil Steitz a écrit : > On 11/16/10 7:10 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > [...] >>

Re: [math] CMA-ES optimization algorithm

2010-11-19 Thread Ted Dunning
Oh. That is very different. So why not have either a) three getters to get the different matrices or b) one getter that returns a structure packaging these matrices? Why use a callback structure? On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 1:55 AM, Dr. Dietmar Wolz wrote: > And it was not meant to monitor "pro

[lang3] Test Fail in Headless Mode (at Least on a Mac)

2010-11-19 Thread Stefan Bodewig
Hi, I'm pretty sure lang3 isn't the only project that is affected, it's just the first one we've seen it. "we" ist the Gump project. Sander has set up a Mac to run Gump[1] and commons-lang3 is Gump's guinea pig for Maven 3.x builds in the workspace we use for developer tests and new installation

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons NET 2.2 based on RC3

2010-11-19 Thread sebb
On 19 November 2010 13:29, Luc Maisonobe wrote: > Le 17/11/2010 02:27, sebb a écrit : >> This is a vote to release Apache Commons NET 2.2 based on RC3. >> >> Changes since RC1 are: >> - drop unnecessary jars from binary archive >> - include RELEASE-NOTES in binary and source archives >> >> [ ] +1

Re: [math] preparing smooth interface upgrade for users

2010-11-19 Thread Phil Steitz
On 11/19/10 8:52 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote: Le 17/11/2010 21:08, sebb a écrit : On 17 November 2010 19:53, Luc Maisonobe wrote: Le 17/11/2010 13:48, Phil Steitz a écrit : On 11/16/10 7:10 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: [...] I think this transition is the smoother path for our users. Do you think

Re: [math] preparing smooth interface upgrade for users

2010-11-19 Thread Luc Maisonobe
Le 17/11/2010 21:08, sebb a écrit : > On 17 November 2010 19:53, Luc Maisonobe wrote: >> Le 17/11/2010 13:48, Phil Steitz a écrit : >>> On 11/16/10 7:10 PM, Gilles Sadowski wrote: >>> [...] >>> I think this transition is the smoother path for our users. Do you >>> think >>> this ch

Re: [VOTE] Release Commons NET 2.2 based on RC3

2010-11-19 Thread Luc Maisonobe
Le 17/11/2010 02:27, sebb a écrit : > This is a vote to release Apache Commons NET 2.2 based on RC3. > > Changes since RC1 are: > - drop unnecessary jars from binary archive > - include RELEASE-NOTES in binary and source archives > > [ ] +1 release it > [ ] +0 go ahead I don't care > [ ] -1 no, d

AW: [math] CMA-ES optimization algorithm

2010-11-19 Thread Dr. Dietmar Wolz
>I really don't think that a general progress listener framework implies this >clutter and for long running algorithms is a very nice thing. CM does not >actually have all that many long running algorithms. >On the other hand, the proposed interface is not a general progress listener >and is n