Yes: will you have cycles to do it?
2016-09-12 9:09 GMT-07:00 Nick Pentreath :
> Never actually got around to doing this - do folks still think it
> worthwhile?
>
> On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 at 00:10 Joseph Bradley wrote:
>
>> Sounds good to me. I'd request we be strict during this process about
>> r
Never actually got around to doing this - do folks still think it
worthwhile?
On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 at 00:10 Joseph Bradley 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
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 wrote:
> +1, adding some organization would make it easier for people to find a
> specific example
>
+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 wrote:
> This sounds good to me, and it will make ML examples more neatly.
>
> 2016-04-14 5:28 GMT-07:00 Nick Pentreath :
>
>> Hey Spark devs
>>
>> I noticed that
This sounds good to me, and it will make ML examples more neatly.
2016-04-14 5:28 GMT-07:00 Nick Pentreath :
> 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 large
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 organi
