On 7/19/13 12:38 PM, Ted Dunning wrote: > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> It still seems to me that it would serve CM well to pay more attention to >>> Ajo's comments and suggestions. Simply saying that we should focus on >>> technical discussion when CM's list is filled with esthetic arguments >>> really just sounds like a way of pushing people away. >> Please read the threads. This is not "esthetics." Maybe you can >> help. >> > I read the threads. I stand by my assertions that there are *lots* of > non-technical discussions on CM. > > Rejecting this particular argument since it is procedural+technical rather > than just technical seems less supportable than continuing those other > threads. > > Help? The way that I help with the esthetic threads is by staying out of > the way. Contributing to the noise level is not helpful and the endurance > and spare time of the typical CM poster is apparently boundless. > > With this thread, the input I have is that Ajo's comments make a lot of > sense (to me) and the "technical" arguments against including AQ as an > option do not make a lot of sense (to me).
The question is how correctly to do AQ and how to correctly handle improper integrals. What I would appreciate is some real numerical analysis or pointers to where we can do the research to support what Ajo is asking us to commit. Just running tests on one problem instance demonstrates nothing. I asked politely several times and got no response. I know you don't like a lot of the design decisions we have made, Ted, and several years back when you actually submitted some code, we did not decide to change the structure of our then API to include it. Could be we were right, could be we were wrong. It is what it is. Complaining again and again over the years accomplishes nothing and is frankly bad for the community. We have a healthy group of active committers here and a healthy "long tail" of volunteers submitting patches that *do* get committed. Just look at the changelog or pom.xml. We are not perfect; but we are meritocracy and a do-ocracy - just like any other serious OSS project. Your contributions are always welcome and while it may not always seem like it, your technical opinions are always taken very seriously. In this case, regarding AQ, change of variable and handling improper integrals, I at least would very much like to hear what you have to say. But please, lets first talk about the algorithms and numerics. Then we agree *what* we want to implement. Then we agree how to integrate it. Phil > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
