On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Gilles Sadowski <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi. > >> The clirr report run from the current MATH_2_X branch is, as expected, >> problematic. To get 2.2. out, we need to agree on what breaks we are going >> to allow and what we are going to fix. Here is a first cut and proposal >> for some immediate fixes that I would appreciate feedback on. >> >> [...] >> >> 4) Incompatible changes in the optimization package. > > IIRC, some of the changes in "AbstractLeastSquares" were related to a bug > fix (performed by Dimitri). So this should probably not be reverted to an > older version. > After looking carefully at the code, it appears that the incompatible changes were introduced in r985828, which does not appear to have fixed any bugs or modified and test cases. While the changelog is updated in this commit, the bug fixes had been applied in r985589 and r984404, before the incompatible changes were introduced. I would like to revert the incompatible changes in the 2.x branch. Would appreciate confirmation that my understanding is correct and review of my commits, or obviously other volunteers to do this. After reverting the r985828, we need to remember to reapply the FastMath changes.
> This problem > --- > Method 'public double solve(int, > org.apache.commons.math.analysis.UnivariateRealFunction, double, double)' > has been added to an interface Fixed. > --- > results from trying to prepare users for the change in 3.0 > > As is the case with "fields weakened to private". > > For these, you could try to revert the changes. > Working on these. Patches / commits welcome. Phil > > Best regards, > Gilles > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
