The one thing that's really ticking me off is that I realize that Phil's grasp
of probability is a lot fresher than my own. Anyways don't worry about it. I
hope we can piece all of this back together, because I have a lot more stuff to
annoy some of you with.
Cheers,
Ole
On 02/06/2016 05:3
On 2/6/16 4:34 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> 1. I don't understand the source of urgency here. If someone has a new
> algorithm they want to release to the general public, they can put it
> on github. It does not matter very much if a method is sitting in
> Apache (commons) Math on any particular s
1. I don't understand the source of urgency here. If someone has a new
algorithm they want to release to the general public, they can put it
on github. It does not matter very much if a method is sitting in
Apache (commons) Math on any particular schedule. It's not like adding
a feature to some pla
I don't know that Dave intended his comments precisely as an indictment in
this specific situation, but he is certainly neither the first nor, almost
certainly, the last person to express similar feelings. I appreciated your
support during my recent release vote, Phil, and would be sorry to see you
On 2/6/16 11:57 AM, dbrosIus wrote:
> The problem with the revolutionary vs evolutionary post is that you say to
> the revolutionaries "go off and play around. Invest all kinds of effort and
> time" but we are going to not give you any kind of sense as to whether we
> will do anything with what
Am 06.02.2016 um 12:31 schrieb James Carman:
> Okay, folks, this is definitely getting out of hand. Let's put a moratorium
> on this thread for the weekend or something and try to come back together
> next week and try to move forward. I would urge folks to watch this while
> we wait:
>
> https:
The problem with the revolutionary vs evolutionary post is that you say to the
revolutionaries "go off and play around. Invest all kinds of effort and time"
but we are going to not give you any kind of sense as to whether we will do
anything with what you produced. "WE" the status quo will decid
On 06/02/2016 11:31, James Carman wrote:
> Okay, folks, this is definitely getting out of hand. Let's put a moratorium
> on this thread for the weekend or something and try to come back together
> next week and try to move forward. I would urge folks to watch this while
> we wait:
>
> https://m.yo
Okay, folks, this is definitely getting out of hand. Let's put a moratorium
on this thread for the weekend or something and try to come back together
next week and try to move forward. I would urge folks to watch this while
we wait:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rOWmrlft2FI
p.s. Phil, I do hope y
Hi folks,
I made my proposal for “Apache Commons Email & Exec” today :-)
Cheers,
Siegfried Goeschl
> On 05 Feb 2016, at 18:24, Melissa Warnkin wrote:
>
> Want to go to the beautiful city of Vancouver, BC?
>
> enjoy the evening receptions with the delicious (free) food and great
> (free
As a veteran of the Great Tomcat Flame Wars let me show you how this should
be done.
Gilles is too ignorant of even basic statistics (as shown by his post on
geometric distributions) to even be working on PRNGs. As a user of C-M I
would never use any class authored by Gilles relating to random num
11 matches
Mail list logo
