You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@mahout.apache.org by Sebastian Schelter <ss...@apache.org> on 2013/06/08 19:26:46 UTC
Re: [DRAFT] 0.8 Release Announcement + Future Plans Discussion
Hi Grant,
Very good release announcement. I propose that we deprecate a lot more,
I think we should be aggressive here to pave the way for a clean and
slim 1.0 release.
I propose to additionally deprecate the following algorithms, as to my
state of knowledge, they are not actively used:
Collaborative Filtering:
- all recommenders in o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender.knn
- the TreeClusteringRecommender in o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender
- the SlopeOne implementations in o.a.m..cf.taste.hadoop.slopeone and
o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender.slopeone
- the distributed pseudo recommender in o.a.m.cf.taste.hadoop.pseudo
Classification:
- the Hidden Markov Models in o.a.m.classifier.sequencelearning.hmm
Clustering
- Fuzzy k-Means o.a.m.clustering.fuzzykmeans
- Spectral k-Means in o.a.m.clustering.spectral
Math
- the tooling in o.a.m.math.stats.entropy
Furthermore, I think we should deprecate the Lanczos implementation in
o.a.m.math.hadoop.decomposer and port all code that uses it to SSVD.
To all users and other committers, this is a biased first proposal,
please shout, if you see things different and want to have things kept.
Best,
Sebastian
On 08.06.2013 16:42, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> More tests are always welcome.
>
> On Jun 8, 2013, at 10:29 AM, Ravi Mummulla <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Grant,
>> Regarding 1.0 plans, do we also want to include a note on adding tests
>> where they don't exist or improving them where needed or is that implicit?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 3:55 AM, Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Mahouts,
>>>
>>> A full copy of proposed draft release notes are up at
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAHOUT/Release+0.8. Please
>>> add/edit as appropriate.
>>>
>>> IN PARTICULAR, PLEASE PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE SECTION LABELLED __FUTURE
>>> PLANS__, which I have included below. This is purely my own opinion, but I
>>> think it reflects conversations I've had w/ both Robin and Sebastian at
>>> Berlin Buzzwords. I'm also interested in opinions on my proposed
>>> deprecation plan (which I haven't discussed with anyone) which is put forth
>>> in the 1.0 plans below.
>>>
>>> -------------------------- DRAFT -------------------------
>>> FUTURE PLANS
>>>
>>> 0.9
>>>
>>> As the project moves towards a 1.0 release, the community is working to
>>> clean up and/or remove parts of the code base that are under-supported or
>>> that underperform as well as to better focus the energy and contributions
>>> on key algorithms that are proven to scale in production and have seen
>>> wide-spread adoption. To this end, in the next release, the project is
>>> planning on removing support for the following algorithms unless there is
>>> sustained support and improvement of them before the next release.
>>>
>>> The algorithms to be removed are:
>>> - From Clustering:
>>> Dirichlet
>>> MeanShift
>>> MinHash
>>> - From Classification (both are sequential implementations)
>>> Winnow
>>> Perceptron
>>> - Frequent Pattern Mining
>>> - Collaborative Filtering
>>> GSI: DO ANY GO HERE?
>>> - Other
>>> GSI: ANYTHING?
>>>
>>> If you are interested in supporting 1 or more of these algorithms, please
>>> make it known on dev@mahout.apache.org and via JIRA issues that fix
>>> and/or improve them. Please also provide supporting evidence as to there
>>> effectiveness for you in production.
>>>
>>> 1.0 PLANS
>>>
>>> Our plans as a community are to focus 0.9 on cleanup of bugs and the
>>> removal of the code mentioned above and then to follow with a 1.0 release
>>> soon thereafter, at which point the community is committing to the support
>>> of the algorithms packaged in the 1.0 for at least two minor versions after
>>> their release. In the case of removal, we will deprecate the functionality
>>> in the 1.(x+1) minor release and remove it in the 1.(x+2) release. For
>>> instance, if feature X is to be removed after the 1.2 release, it will be
>>> deprecated in 1.3 and removed in 1.4.
>>>
>>> ------------------- DRAFT ----------------------
>>>
>>> -Grant
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thanks.
>
> --------------------------------------------
> Grant Ingersoll | @gsingers
> http://www.lucidworks.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: [DRAFT] 0.8 Release Announcement + Future Plans Discussion
Posted by Sean Owen <sr...@gmail.com>.
I agree with deprecating all of that FWIW.
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Collaborative Filtering:
>>
>> - all recommenders in o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender.knn
>>
>> - the TreeClusteringRecommender in o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender
>>
>> - the SlopeOne implementations in o.a.m..cf.taste.hadoop.slopeone and
>> o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender.slopeone
>>
>> - the distributed pseudo recommender in o.a.m.cf.taste.hadoop.pseudo
>
> Pseudo is useful, no? Don't know about the others.
Re: [DRAFT] 0.8 Release Announcement + Future Plans Discussion
Posted by Sebastian Schelter <ss...@apache.org>.
I didn't refer to the stats stuff in math, but to stats.entropy in core/
which has Hadoop code to calculate entropy etc.
2013/6/9 Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com>
> Actually this stats stuff is definitely used in application code (of mine
> if not others).
>
> The OnlineSummarizer has 20 usages throughout Mahout.
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 11:08 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsingers@apache.org
> >wrote:
>
> > Yes, please edit the Wiki directly with the highlights!
> >
> >
> > On Jun 8, 2013, at 3:21 PM, Suneel Marthi <su...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Under Release Highlights, please also add:
> > >
> > > a) Dan's Streaming kmeans clustering.
> > > b) Mahout upgrade to be Lucene 4.3.0 compatible
> > >
> > >
> > > (both of the above deserve special mentions along with lucene2seq and
> > vector/matrix performance improvements).
> >
> >
>
Re: [DRAFT] 0.8 Release Announcement + Future Plans Discussion
Posted by Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com>.
Actually this stats stuff is definitely used in application code (of mine
if not others).
The OnlineSummarizer has 20 usages throughout Mahout.
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 11:08 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org>wrote:
> Yes, please edit the Wiki directly with the highlights!
>
>
> On Jun 8, 2013, at 3:21 PM, Suneel Marthi <su...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Under Release Highlights, please also add:
> >
> > a) Dan's Streaming kmeans clustering.
> > b) Mahout upgrade to be Lucene 4.3.0 compatible
> >
> >
> > (both of the above deserve special mentions along with lucene2seq and
> vector/matrix performance improvements).
>
>
Re: [DRAFT] 0.8 Release Announcement + Future Plans Discussion
Posted by Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org>.
Yes, please edit the Wiki directly with the highlights!
On Jun 8, 2013, at 3:21 PM, Suneel Marthi <su...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Under Release Highlights, please also add:
>
> a) Dan's Streaming kmeans clustering.
> b) Mahout upgrade to be Lucene 4.3.0 compatible
>
>
> (both of the above deserve special mentions along with lucene2seq and vector/matrix performance improvements).
Re: [DRAFT] 0.8 Release Announcement + Future Plans Discussion
Posted by Suneel Marthi <su...@yahoo.com>.
Under Release Highlights, please also add:
a) Dan's Streaming kmeans clustering.
b) Mahout upgrade to be Lucene 4.3.0 compatible
(both of the above deserve special mentions along with lucene2seq and vector/matrix performance improvements).
________________________________
From: Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org>
To: dev@mahout.apache.org; ssc@apache.org
Cc: user@mahout.apache.org
Sent: Saturday, June 8, 2013 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: [DRAFT] 0.8 Release Announcement + Future Plans Discussion
On Jun 8, 2013, at 1:26 PM, Sebastian Schelter <ss...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Grant,
>
> Very good release announcement. I propose that we deprecate a lot more,
> I think we should be aggressive here to pave the way for a clean and
> slim 1.0 release.
>
> I propose to additionally deprecate the following algorithms, as to my
> state of knowledge, they are not actively used:
>
> Collaborative Filtering:
>
> - all recommenders in o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender.knn
>
> - the TreeClusteringRecommender in o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender
>
> - the SlopeOne implementations in o.a.m..cf.taste.hadoop.slopeone and
> o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender.slopeone
>
> - the distributed pseudo recommender in o.a.m.cf.taste.hadoop.pseudo
Pseudo is useful, no? Don't know about the others.
>
> Classification:
>
> - the Hidden Markov Models in o.a.m.classifier.sequencelearning.hmm
We have some parallel training stuff coming, so I'd say -1 here, as I think HMMs are pretty important, no?
>
> Clustering
>
> - Fuzzy k-Means o.a.m.clustering.fuzzykmeans
> - Spectral k-Means in o.a.m.clustering.spectral
-1 on spectral being dropped as that seems to receive decent traction.
Not sure on Fuzzy, as I think it is a pretty trivial extension of K-Means.
>
> Math
>
> - the tooling in o.a.m.math.stats.entropy
>
> Furthermore, I think we should deprecate the Lanczos implementation in
> o.a.m.math.hadoop.decomposer and port all code that uses it to SSVD.
No opinion.
+1 on everything else.
>
> To all users and other committers, this is a biased first proposal,
> please shout, if you see things different and want to have things kept.
>
> Best,
> Sebastian
>
>
> On 08.06.2013 16:42, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>> More tests are always welcome.
>>
>> On Jun 8, 2013, at 10:29 AM, Ravi Mummulla <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Grant,
>>> Regarding 1.0 plans, do we also want to include a note on adding tests
>>> where they don't exist or improving them where needed or is that implicit?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 3:55 AM, Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Mahouts,
>>>>
>>>> A full copy of proposed draft release notes are up at
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAHOUT/Release+0.8. Please
>>>> add/edit as appropriate.
>>>>
>>>> IN PARTICULAR, PLEASE PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE SECTION LABELLED __FUTURE
>>>> PLANS__, which I have included below. This is purely my own opinion, but I
>>>> think it reflects conversations I've had w/ both Robin and Sebastian at
>>>> Berlin Buzzwords. I'm also interested in opinions on my proposed
>>>> deprecation plan (which I haven't discussed with anyone) which is put forth
>>>> in the 1.0 plans below.
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------- DRAFT -------------------------
>>>> FUTURE PLANS
>>>>
>>>> 0.9
>>>>
>>>> As the project moves towards a 1.0 release, the community is working to
>>>> clean up and/or remove parts of the code base that are under-supported or
>>>> that underperform as well as to better focus the energy and contributions
>>>> on key algorithms that are proven to scale in production and have seen
>>>> wide-spread adoption. To this end, in the next release, the project is
>>>> planning on removing support for the following algorithms unless there is
>>>> sustained support and improvement of them before the next release.
>>>>
>>>> The algorithms to be removed are:
>>>> - From Clustering:
>>>> Dirichlet
>>>> MeanShift
>>>> MinHash
>>>> - From Classification (both are sequential implementations)
>>>> Winnow
>>>> Perceptron
>>>> - Frequent Pattern Mining
>>>> - Collaborative Filtering
>>>> GSI: DO ANY GO HERE?
>>>> - Other
>>>> GSI: ANYTHING?
>>>>
>>>> If you are interested in supporting 1 or more of these algorithms, please
>>>> make it known on dev@mahout.apache.org and via JIRA issues that fix
>>>> and/or improve them. Please also provide supporting evidence as to there
>>>> effectiveness for you in production.
>>>>
>>>> 1.0 PLANS
>>>>
>>>> Our plans as a community are to focus 0.9 on cleanup of bugs and the
>>>> removal of the code mentioned above and then to follow with a 1.0 release
>>>> soon thereafter, at which point the community is committing to the support
>>>> of the algorithms packaged in the 1.0 for at least two minor versions after
>>>> their release. In the case of removal, we will deprecate the functionality
>>>> in the 1.(x+1) minor release and remove it in the 1.(x+2) release. For
>>>> instance, if feature X is to be removed after the 1.2 release, it will be
>>>> deprecated in 1.3 and removed in 1.4.
>>>>
>>>> ------------------- DRAFT ----------------------
>>>>
>>>> -Grant
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks.
>>
>> --------------------------------------------
>> Grant Ingersoll | @gsingers
>> http://www.lucidworks.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
--------------------------------------------
Grant Ingersoll | @gsingers
http://www.lucidworks.com
Re: [DRAFT] 0.8 Release Announcement + Future Plans Discussion
Posted by Suneel Marthi <su...@yahoo.com>.
Under Release Highlights, please also add:
a) Dan's Streaming kmeans clustering.
b) Mahout upgrade to be Lucene 4.3.0 compatible
(both of the above deserve special mentions along with lucene2seq and vector/matrix performance improvements).
________________________________
From: Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org>
To: dev@mahout.apache.org; ssc@apache.org
Cc: user@mahout.apache.org
Sent: Saturday, June 8, 2013 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: [DRAFT] 0.8 Release Announcement + Future Plans Discussion
On Jun 8, 2013, at 1:26 PM, Sebastian Schelter <ss...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Grant,
>
> Very good release announcement. I propose that we deprecate a lot more,
> I think we should be aggressive here to pave the way for a clean and
> slim 1.0 release.
>
> I propose to additionally deprecate the following algorithms, as to my
> state of knowledge, they are not actively used:
>
> Collaborative Filtering:
>
> - all recommenders in o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender.knn
>
> - the TreeClusteringRecommender in o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender
>
> - the SlopeOne implementations in o.a.m..cf.taste.hadoop.slopeone and
> o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender.slopeone
>
> - the distributed pseudo recommender in o.a.m.cf.taste.hadoop.pseudo
Pseudo is useful, no? Don't know about the others.
>
> Classification:
>
> - the Hidden Markov Models in o.a.m.classifier.sequencelearning.hmm
We have some parallel training stuff coming, so I'd say -1 here, as I think HMMs are pretty important, no?
>
> Clustering
>
> - Fuzzy k-Means o.a.m.clustering.fuzzykmeans
> - Spectral k-Means in o.a.m.clustering.spectral
-1 on spectral being dropped as that seems to receive decent traction.
Not sure on Fuzzy, as I think it is a pretty trivial extension of K-Means.
>
> Math
>
> - the tooling in o.a.m.math.stats.entropy
>
> Furthermore, I think we should deprecate the Lanczos implementation in
> o.a.m.math.hadoop.decomposer and port all code that uses it to SSVD.
No opinion.
+1 on everything else.
>
> To all users and other committers, this is a biased first proposal,
> please shout, if you see things different and want to have things kept.
>
> Best,
> Sebastian
>
>
> On 08.06.2013 16:42, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>> More tests are always welcome.
>>
>> On Jun 8, 2013, at 10:29 AM, Ravi Mummulla <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Grant,
>>> Regarding 1.0 plans, do we also want to include a note on adding tests
>>> where they don't exist or improving them where needed or is that implicit?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 3:55 AM, Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Mahouts,
>>>>
>>>> A full copy of proposed draft release notes are up at
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAHOUT/Release+0.8. Please
>>>> add/edit as appropriate.
>>>>
>>>> IN PARTICULAR, PLEASE PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE SECTION LABELLED __FUTURE
>>>> PLANS__, which I have included below. This is purely my own opinion, but I
>>>> think it reflects conversations I've had w/ both Robin and Sebastian at
>>>> Berlin Buzzwords. I'm also interested in opinions on my proposed
>>>> deprecation plan (which I haven't discussed with anyone) which is put forth
>>>> in the 1.0 plans below.
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------- DRAFT -------------------------
>>>> FUTURE PLANS
>>>>
>>>> 0.9
>>>>
>>>> As the project moves towards a 1.0 release, the community is working to
>>>> clean up and/or remove parts of the code base that are under-supported or
>>>> that underperform as well as to better focus the energy and contributions
>>>> on key algorithms that are proven to scale in production and have seen
>>>> wide-spread adoption. To this end, in the next release, the project is
>>>> planning on removing support for the following algorithms unless there is
>>>> sustained support and improvement of them before the next release.
>>>>
>>>> The algorithms to be removed are:
>>>> - From Clustering:
>>>> Dirichlet
>>>> MeanShift
>>>> MinHash
>>>> - From Classification (both are sequential implementations)
>>>> Winnow
>>>> Perceptron
>>>> - Frequent Pattern Mining
>>>> - Collaborative Filtering
>>>> GSI: DO ANY GO HERE?
>>>> - Other
>>>> GSI: ANYTHING?
>>>>
>>>> If you are interested in supporting 1 or more of these algorithms, please
>>>> make it known on dev@mahout.apache.org and via JIRA issues that fix
>>>> and/or improve them. Please also provide supporting evidence as to there
>>>> effectiveness for you in production.
>>>>
>>>> 1.0 PLANS
>>>>
>>>> Our plans as a community are to focus 0.9 on cleanup of bugs and the
>>>> removal of the code mentioned above and then to follow with a 1.0 release
>>>> soon thereafter, at which point the community is committing to the support
>>>> of the algorithms packaged in the 1.0 for at least two minor versions after
>>>> their release. In the case of removal, we will deprecate the functionality
>>>> in the 1.(x+1) minor release and remove it in the 1.(x+2) release. For
>>>> instance, if feature X is to be removed after the 1.2 release, it will be
>>>> deprecated in 1.3 and removed in 1.4.
>>>>
>>>> ------------------- DRAFT ----------------------
>>>>
>>>> -Grant
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks.
>>
>> --------------------------------------------
>> Grant Ingersoll | @gsingers
>> http://www.lucidworks.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
--------------------------------------------
Grant Ingersoll | @gsingers
http://www.lucidworks.com
Re: [DRAFT] 0.8 Release Announcement + Future Plans Discussion
Posted by Shannon Quinn <sq...@gatech.edu>.
Sorry, that's o.a.m.clustering.spectral.eigencuts. Then move the .kmeans
package to simply be o.a.m.clustering.spectral .
On 6/8/13 1:37 PM, Shannon Quinn wrote:
>
>>> Clustering
>>>
>>> - Fuzzy k-Means o.a.m.clustering.fuzzykmeans
>>> - Spectral k-Means in o.a.m.clustering.spectral
>> -1 on spectral being dropped as that seems to receive decent traction.
> Agreed, given recent activity in particular. However I would put forth
> deprecating Eigencuts (o.a.m.clustering.eigencuts) until such time
> that it can be made scalable.
>
Re: [DRAFT] 0.8 Release Announcement + Future Plans Discussion
Posted by Shannon Quinn <sq...@gatech.edu>.
>> Clustering
>>
>> - Fuzzy k-Means o.a.m.clustering.fuzzykmeans
>> - Spectral k-Means in o.a.m.clustering.spectral
> -1 on spectral being dropped as that seems to receive decent traction.
Agreed, given recent activity in particular. However I would put forth
deprecating Eigencuts (o.a.m.clustering.eigencuts) until such time that
it can be made scalable.
Re: [DRAFT] 0.8 Release Announcement + Future Plans Discussion
Posted by Sean Owen <sr...@gmail.com>.
I agree with deprecating all of that FWIW.
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Collaborative Filtering:
>>
>> - all recommenders in o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender.knn
>>
>> - the TreeClusteringRecommender in o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender
>>
>> - the SlopeOne implementations in o.a.m..cf.taste.hadoop.slopeone and
>> o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender.slopeone
>>
>> - the distributed pseudo recommender in o.a.m.cf.taste.hadoop.pseudo
>
> Pseudo is useful, no? Don't know about the others.
Re: [DRAFT] 0.8 Release Announcement + Future Plans Discussion
Posted by Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org>.
On Jun 8, 2013, at 1:26 PM, Sebastian Schelter <ss...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Grant,
>
> Very good release announcement. I propose that we deprecate a lot more,
> I think we should be aggressive here to pave the way for a clean and
> slim 1.0 release.
>
> I propose to additionally deprecate the following algorithms, as to my
> state of knowledge, they are not actively used:
>
> Collaborative Filtering:
>
> - all recommenders in o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender.knn
>
> - the TreeClusteringRecommender in o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender
>
> - the SlopeOne implementations in o.a.m..cf.taste.hadoop.slopeone and
> o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender.slopeone
>
> - the distributed pseudo recommender in o.a.m.cf.taste.hadoop.pseudo
Pseudo is useful, no? Don't know about the others.
>
> Classification:
>
> - the Hidden Markov Models in o.a.m.classifier.sequencelearning.hmm
We have some parallel training stuff coming, so I'd say -1 here, as I think HMMs are pretty important, no?
>
> Clustering
>
> - Fuzzy k-Means o.a.m.clustering.fuzzykmeans
> - Spectral k-Means in o.a.m.clustering.spectral
-1 on spectral being dropped as that seems to receive decent traction.
Not sure on Fuzzy, as I think it is a pretty trivial extension of K-Means.
>
> Math
>
> - the tooling in o.a.m.math.stats.entropy
>
> Furthermore, I think we should deprecate the Lanczos implementation in
> o.a.m.math.hadoop.decomposer and port all code that uses it to SSVD.
No opinion.
+1 on everything else.
>
> To all users and other committers, this is a biased first proposal,
> please shout, if you see things different and want to have things kept.
>
> Best,
> Sebastian
>
>
> On 08.06.2013 16:42, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>> More tests are always welcome.
>>
>> On Jun 8, 2013, at 10:29 AM, Ravi Mummulla <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Grant,
>>> Regarding 1.0 plans, do we also want to include a note on adding tests
>>> where they don't exist or improving them where needed or is that implicit?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 3:55 AM, Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Mahouts,
>>>>
>>>> A full copy of proposed draft release notes are up at
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAHOUT/Release+0.8. Please
>>>> add/edit as appropriate.
>>>>
>>>> IN PARTICULAR, PLEASE PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE SECTION LABELLED __FUTURE
>>>> PLANS__, which I have included below. This is purely my own opinion, but I
>>>> think it reflects conversations I've had w/ both Robin and Sebastian at
>>>> Berlin Buzzwords. I'm also interested in opinions on my proposed
>>>> deprecation plan (which I haven't discussed with anyone) which is put forth
>>>> in the 1.0 plans below.
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------- DRAFT -------------------------
>>>> FUTURE PLANS
>>>>
>>>> 0.9
>>>>
>>>> As the project moves towards a 1.0 release, the community is working to
>>>> clean up and/or remove parts of the code base that are under-supported or
>>>> that underperform as well as to better focus the energy and contributions
>>>> on key algorithms that are proven to scale in production and have seen
>>>> wide-spread adoption. To this end, in the next release, the project is
>>>> planning on removing support for the following algorithms unless there is
>>>> sustained support and improvement of them before the next release.
>>>>
>>>> The algorithms to be removed are:
>>>> - From Clustering:
>>>> Dirichlet
>>>> MeanShift
>>>> MinHash
>>>> - From Classification (both are sequential implementations)
>>>> Winnow
>>>> Perceptron
>>>> - Frequent Pattern Mining
>>>> - Collaborative Filtering
>>>> GSI: DO ANY GO HERE?
>>>> - Other
>>>> GSI: ANYTHING?
>>>>
>>>> If you are interested in supporting 1 or more of these algorithms, please
>>>> make it known on dev@mahout.apache.org and via JIRA issues that fix
>>>> and/or improve them. Please also provide supporting evidence as to there
>>>> effectiveness for you in production.
>>>>
>>>> 1.0 PLANS
>>>>
>>>> Our plans as a community are to focus 0.9 on cleanup of bugs and the
>>>> removal of the code mentioned above and then to follow with a 1.0 release
>>>> soon thereafter, at which point the community is committing to the support
>>>> of the algorithms packaged in the 1.0 for at least two minor versions after
>>>> their release. In the case of removal, we will deprecate the functionality
>>>> in the 1.(x+1) minor release and remove it in the 1.(x+2) release. For
>>>> instance, if feature X is to be removed after the 1.2 release, it will be
>>>> deprecated in 1.3 and removed in 1.4.
>>>>
>>>> ------------------- DRAFT ----------------------
>>>>
>>>> -Grant
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks.
>>
>> --------------------------------------------
>> Grant Ingersoll | @gsingers
>> http://www.lucidworks.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
--------------------------------------------
Grant Ingersoll | @gsingers
http://www.lucidworks.com
Re: [DRAFT] 0.8 Release Announcement + Future Plans Discussion
Posted by Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org>.
On Jun 8, 2013, at 1:26 PM, Sebastian Schelter <ss...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Grant,
>
> Very good release announcement. I propose that we deprecate a lot more,
> I think we should be aggressive here to pave the way for a clean and
> slim 1.0 release.
>
> I propose to additionally deprecate the following algorithms, as to my
> state of knowledge, they are not actively used:
>
> Collaborative Filtering:
>
> - all recommenders in o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender.knn
>
> - the TreeClusteringRecommender in o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender
>
> - the SlopeOne implementations in o.a.m..cf.taste.hadoop.slopeone and
> o.a.m.cf.taste.impl.recommender.slopeone
>
> - the distributed pseudo recommender in o.a.m.cf.taste.hadoop.pseudo
Pseudo is useful, no? Don't know about the others.
>
> Classification:
>
> - the Hidden Markov Models in o.a.m.classifier.sequencelearning.hmm
We have some parallel training stuff coming, so I'd say -1 here, as I think HMMs are pretty important, no?
>
> Clustering
>
> - Fuzzy k-Means o.a.m.clustering.fuzzykmeans
> - Spectral k-Means in o.a.m.clustering.spectral
-1 on spectral being dropped as that seems to receive decent traction.
Not sure on Fuzzy, as I think it is a pretty trivial extension of K-Means.
>
> Math
>
> - the tooling in o.a.m.math.stats.entropy
>
> Furthermore, I think we should deprecate the Lanczos implementation in
> o.a.m.math.hadoop.decomposer and port all code that uses it to SSVD.
No opinion.
+1 on everything else.
>
> To all users and other committers, this is a biased first proposal,
> please shout, if you see things different and want to have things kept.
>
> Best,
> Sebastian
>
>
> On 08.06.2013 16:42, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>> More tests are always welcome.
>>
>> On Jun 8, 2013, at 10:29 AM, Ravi Mummulla <ra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Grant,
>>> Regarding 1.0 plans, do we also want to include a note on adding tests
>>> where they don't exist or improving them where needed or is that implicit?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 3:55 AM, Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Mahouts,
>>>>
>>>> A full copy of proposed draft release notes are up at
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAHOUT/Release+0.8. Please
>>>> add/edit as appropriate.
>>>>
>>>> IN PARTICULAR, PLEASE PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE SECTION LABELLED __FUTURE
>>>> PLANS__, which I have included below. This is purely my own opinion, but I
>>>> think it reflects conversations I've had w/ both Robin and Sebastian at
>>>> Berlin Buzzwords. I'm also interested in opinions on my proposed
>>>> deprecation plan (which I haven't discussed with anyone) which is put forth
>>>> in the 1.0 plans below.
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------- DRAFT -------------------------
>>>> FUTURE PLANS
>>>>
>>>> 0.9
>>>>
>>>> As the project moves towards a 1.0 release, the community is working to
>>>> clean up and/or remove parts of the code base that are under-supported or
>>>> that underperform as well as to better focus the energy and contributions
>>>> on key algorithms that are proven to scale in production and have seen
>>>> wide-spread adoption. To this end, in the next release, the project is
>>>> planning on removing support for the following algorithms unless there is
>>>> sustained support and improvement of them before the next release.
>>>>
>>>> The algorithms to be removed are:
>>>> - From Clustering:
>>>> Dirichlet
>>>> MeanShift
>>>> MinHash
>>>> - From Classification (both are sequential implementations)
>>>> Winnow
>>>> Perceptron
>>>> - Frequent Pattern Mining
>>>> - Collaborative Filtering
>>>> GSI: DO ANY GO HERE?
>>>> - Other
>>>> GSI: ANYTHING?
>>>>
>>>> If you are interested in supporting 1 or more of these algorithms, please
>>>> make it known on dev@mahout.apache.org and via JIRA issues that fix
>>>> and/or improve them. Please also provide supporting evidence as to there
>>>> effectiveness for you in production.
>>>>
>>>> 1.0 PLANS
>>>>
>>>> Our plans as a community are to focus 0.9 on cleanup of bugs and the
>>>> removal of the code mentioned above and then to follow with a 1.0 release
>>>> soon thereafter, at which point the community is committing to the support
>>>> of the algorithms packaged in the 1.0 for at least two minor versions after
>>>> their release. In the case of removal, we will deprecate the functionality
>>>> in the 1.(x+1) minor release and remove it in the 1.(x+2) release. For
>>>> instance, if feature X is to be removed after the 1.2 release, it will be
>>>> deprecated in 1.3 and removed in 1.4.
>>>>
>>>> ------------------- DRAFT ----------------------
>>>>
>>>> -Grant
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks.
>>
>> --------------------------------------------
>> Grant Ingersoll | @gsingers
>> http://www.lucidworks.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
--------------------------------------------
Grant Ingersoll | @gsingers
http://www.lucidworks.com