Yes, count me in. On Mar 3, 2014, at 7:34, Sebastian Schelter <s...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thats a very good idea. I'm happy to join! > > On 03/03/2014 07:31 AM, Ravi Mummulla wrote: >> Ted and others, >> Once we have enough thoughts on 1.0 on this thread, can we get together on >> Google Hangout and discuss the the plan, prioritize the work, and talk >> about rough timeline for landing 1.0? We can then create JIRAs and go from >> there. If everyone agrees, any preferences on a rough hangout date? >> >> Thanks. >> >> >> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Ravi, >>> >>> Good points. >>> >>> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 12:38 AM, Ravi Mummulla <ravi.mummu...@gmail.com >>>> wrote: >>> >>>> - Natively support Windows (guidance, etc. No documentation exists today, >>>> for instance) >>> >>> There is a bit of demand for that. >>> >>> - Faster time to first application (from discovery to first application >>>> currently takes a non-trivial amount of effort; how can we lower the bar >>>> and reduce the friction for adoption?) >>> >>> There is huge evidence that this is important. >>> >>> >>>> - Better documenting use cases with working samples/examples >>>> (Documentation >>>> on https://mahout.apache.org/users/basics/algorithms.html is spread out >>>> and >>>> there is too much focus on algorithms as opposed to use cases - this is >>> an >>>> adoption blocker) >>> >>> This is also important. >>> >>> >>>> - Uniformity of the API set across all algorithms (are we providing the >>>> same experience across all APIs?) >>> >>> And many people have been tripped up by this. >>> >>> >>>> - Measuring/publishing scalability metrics of various algorithms (why >>>> would >>>> we want users to adopt Mahout vs. other frameworks for ML at scale?) >>> >>> I don't see this as important as some of your other points, but is still >>> useful. >
