Sean Why do you care so much that Mahout not work on a flexible high performance future? You have stated in prominent interviews left Mahout behind and that it is at the "end of the road".
Your point has been eloquently made and your nihilism about the future of Mahout seems to have little traction. Why not just let go? Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 7, 2014, at 1:52, Sean Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm suggesting that in the current state, demand is low and going > down. The current code base seems de facto deprecated/unsupported > already, and possibly to be removed or dramatically changed into > something as-yet unclear. Nobody here seems to have taken a hard > decision regarding a next major release, but, the trajectory of that > decision seems clear if the current state remains the same. > > From my perspective, "middle-ground" new directions like adding a bit > of H2O, a bit of Spark, leaving bits of M/R code around, etc. are only > worse. I can see why there may be a little renewed demand for the new > bits, but then, why not go all in on one of them? > > Because a substantially all-new direction is a different story. If a > "Mahout2O" or "Spahout" ("Mark"?) emerges as a plan, I could imagine a > lot of renewed demand. And a clearer underlying roadmap sounds > possible. It would remain to be seen, but there's nothing stopping > those ideas from becoming part of a distro too.
