Hi Shannon and Sean, Thank a lot for your replies. For sure you have helped me understand better what you guys would like to see. I will in the next week or so, dive even more into the code, and add things/change my proposal to make it more "down to earth". I will be for sure busy with that and following all the other tips you guys provided me with. Thanks again
Federico On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 5:45 PM, Shannon Quinn <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Federico, > > Sean just sent out an excellent email, and I'd like to mention a few things > related to what he mentioned: >> >> I think if you're looking at JIRA issues and constructing a good proposal >> around that, you >> have a good start. > > JIRA tickets are the place to start. That is where you will find everything > we are currently working toward regarding Mahout, and is a good place to > officially post your proposals (obviously in addition to the GSoC app page). > That way, as we're perusing the open tickets, we can leave you feedback > there, and you can adjust specific aspects of the proposal as necessary, > just as you would any other open ticket. >> >> However, I feel that one of the best things you can do in a proposal is >> convince that you know how much work it is, you know what the steps are, >> and >> you know you can finish it even accounting for unexpected difficulty. >> > +1 > > In glancing over your proposal, they are certainly good ideas from a > standpoint of theory, but I would also love to see some more implementation > specifics, as well as plans for how you intend to test, and what the > timelines would be. Have you looked over how Kmeans is implemented in a > map-reduce fashion? Do you understand how map-reduce works? Can you envision > how you would build the map-reduce paradigm into your kernel smoother and > LSH? Can you divide this project up into phases, and assess how long each > phase would take? >> >> I will also say personally that I would prefer to see GSoC projects that >> focus on architecture, refactoring, performance tuning and measurement, >> tests, etc, rather than implementing another algorithm. Mahout needs the >> former more, I think. But I speak for myself and I am not mentoring. >> > Another excellent point, which I too agree with (though I too speak only for > myself). At the very least, both new algorithms and tuning existing code are > very important and worthy of GSoC projects. Something to keep in mind. > > Shannon > -- Federico Brubacher @fbru02
