On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Artem Barger wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Rob Tompkins wrote:
>
>> So based upon all of the conversation here, I’ve concluded that the best
>> path forward is to attempt to grow the community inside commons. That’s why
>> I’m sticking with attempts to m
On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Rob Tompkins wrote:
> So based upon all of the conversation here, I’ve concluded that the best
> path forward is to attempt to grow the community inside commons. That’s why
> I’m sticking with attempts to make contributions elsewhere in commons to
> gain the requis
My overall impression about the problem is that we have a commons component
that requires a considerable of non-java domain specific knowledge to make
contributions. Thus, our general java expertise is not necessarily sufficient
to vet contributions. From what I can tell, commons-math might be t
On Thu, 4 Aug 2016 13:09:21 -0700, Ralph Goers wrote:
Are you waiting on an answer before reviewing and/or merging his pull
requests?
We are all unlucky that CM developers left. My post with subject
"Commons Math (r)evolution" (referred to below) dates from June 5
(in part inspired by Artem's
Le 3/08/2016 à 09:20, Jörg Schaible a écrit :
> At least for RNG you had three binding votes. Why not simply start with it
> and if the overall experience is positive for the community regarding the
> new component, people might reconsider their decision for the other proposed
> components (or
Are you waiting on an answer before reviewing and/or merging his pull requests?
Ralph
> On Aug 4, 2016, at 10:49 AM, Gilles wrote:
>
> On Thu, 4 Aug 2016 10:13:26 -0400, Artem Barger wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Ralph Goers
>> wrote:
>>
>>> > All I'm saying this is one of the pro
On Thu, 4 Aug 2016 10:13:26 -0400, Artem Barger wrote:
On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Ralph Goers
wrote:
> All I'm saying this is one of the problems within CM, which IMO
only a
> symptom for more acute problem of missing community. Also as you
can see
in
> ML archive I've tried several t
On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Ralph Goers
wrote:
> > All I'm saying this is one of the problems within CM, which IMO only a
> > symptom for more acute problem of missing community. Also as you can see
> in
> > ML archive I've tried several times to rise discussion around work I'm
> > doing and
> On Aug 4, 2016, at 6:39 AM, Artem Barger wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Ralph Goers
> wrote:
>
>> So you are saying that the real problem is that no one involved with
>> Commons Math is acting on the work you are doing. In other projects PRs
>> don’t always get acted upon immedia
On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Ralph Goers
wrote:
> So you are saying that the real problem is that no one involved with
> Commons Math is acting on the work you are doing. In other projects PRs
> don’t always get acted upon immediately, but 3 months is a bit long.
> Pinging on the list to get s
> On Aug 3, 2016, at 3:35 PM, Artem Barger wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Ralph Goers
> wrote:
>
>>> 1. My understanding is that any ASF committer has commit rights to
>> Commons. That is one case for a low barrier to entry. Of course, any
>> committer will want to learn the way-o
On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Ralph Goers
wrote:
> > 1. My understanding is that any ASF committer has commit rights to
> Commons. That is one case for a low barrier to entry. Of course, any
> committer will want to learn the way-of-working at Commons and any
> interesting subprojects, but com
On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 11:41 AM, Ralph Goers
wrote:
> > If that were true, you could have said that the newcomers who
> > want to work on a revised CM are welcome to do so, and the
> > output of that work would normally be adopted by Commons
> > (unless it's proven crappy of course).
>
> OK. Newc
Gilles,
A suggestion from the peanut gallery. Look into the offered contributions and
grow the community should these prove merit. Avoiding these contributions
assures that you are the one who actually wants CM to be dormant..
If POI had not done this over the years the project would be dormant
> -Original Message-
> From: Ralph Goers [mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2016 11:30
> To: Commons Developers List ;
> dennis.hamil...@acm.org
> Subject: Re: [MATH]: Current state of project?
>
>
> > On Aug 3, 2016,
> On Aug 3, 2016, at 9:55 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton
> wrote:
>
> Side questions, below
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Ralph Goers [mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2016 08:41
>> To: Commons Developers List
&
Side questions, below
> -Original Message-
> From: Ralph Goers [mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2016 08:41
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [MATH]: Current state of project?
[ ... ]
> OK. Newcomers are free to work on
> On Aug 3, 2016, at 8:16 AM, Gilles wrote:
>
> On Wed, 3 Aug 2016 07:09:50 -0700, Ralph Goers wrote:
>>> On Aug 3, 2016, at 3:46 AM, Gilles wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 23:59:23 -0700, Ralph Goers wrote:
> On Aug 2, 2016, at 4:00 PM, Gilles wrote:
>
>
> Most PMC member
On Wed, 3 Aug 2016 07:09:50 -0700, Ralph Goers wrote:
On Aug 3, 2016, at 3:46 AM, Gilles
wrote:
On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 23:59:23 -0700, Ralph Goers wrote:
On Aug 2, 2016, at 4:00 PM, Gilles
wrote:
Most PMC members seem to wish that CM becomes dormant.
I totally agree with you that it would be
> On Aug 3, 2016, at 3:46 AM, Gilles wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 23:59:23 -0700, Ralph Goers wrote:
>>> On Aug 2, 2016, at 4:00 PM, Gilles wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Most PMC members seem to wish that CM becomes dormant.
>>> I totally agree with you that it would be good to have _that_
>>> clarifie
On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 23:59:23 -0700, Ralph Goers wrote:
On Aug 2, 2016, at 4:00 PM, Gilles
wrote:
Most PMC members seem to wish that CM becomes dormant.
I totally agree with you that it would be good to have _that_
clarified.
I have no idea how that is your takeaway from all the discussions.
Hi Gilles,
Gilles wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 09:35:43 -0700, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>> There are a number of dangling [VOTE] threads that seem to devolve
>> into inconclusive discussion. Nevertheless, it would be useful for
>> the creator of those votes to resolve them with [RESULT][VOTE]
>>
> On Aug 2, 2016, at 4:00 PM, Gilles wrote:
>
>
> Most PMC members seem to wish that CM becomes dormant.
> I totally agree with you that it would be good to have _that_
> clarified.
I have no idea how that is your takeaway from all the discussions. The point I
have tried to make is that CM ne
s dormant.
I totally agree with you that it would be good to have _that_
clarified.
Gilles
- Dennis
-Original Message-
From: Rob Tompkins [mailto:chtom...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2016 08:56
To: Commons Developers List
Subject: Re: [MATH]: Current state of project?
&
od to have even that clarified.
- Dennis
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Tompkins [mailto:chtom...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2016 08:56
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [MATH]: Current state of project?
>
>
>
> > On Aug 1, 201
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Rob Tompkins wrote:
> Hey Artem,
>
> I agree. I've decided to make some contributions in commons more generally
> to gain report as to become a committer. Until I can do that, I'm guessing
> that it'll just be Gilles accepting pill requests.
>
> Cheers,
> -Rob
>
> On Aug 1, 2016, at 10:58 PM, Artem Barger wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> It's been a while since there was a lot of hot discussion regarding the
> future of the CM project, however I do not think that clear agreement was
> reached. The reason I'm wondering is because I'd like to contribute t
27 matches
Mail list logo
