You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@mahout.apache.org by Daisuke Miyamoto <da...@gmail.com> on 2011/03/07 05:23:21 UTC

JDK requirement for mahout-math

Hello.

I'm trying to build and recognize Mahout.

I know that Mahout requires JDK6.
But mahout-math's pom.xml contains plugin configuration which direct
compile for Java5 as following:

      <plugin>
        <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
        <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
        <configuration>
          <source>1.5</source>
          <target>1.5</target>
        </configuration>
      </plugin>

Furthermore RandomWrapper and DistributionChecks uses
String#getBytes(Charset) and Arrays#copyOf() method.
These methods are not supported in JDK5.

I think it should be configured to compile in Java6.
Feel free to point out my mistakes.


Well, as I read internal sources, I may have other questions about
internal of Mahout.
Is it prefer to post this kind of message to mahout-users mailinglist?

Thanks.
Daisuke Miyamoto

Re: JDK requirement for mahout-math

Posted by Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com>.
I see that.  The change looks good.

I am desperately working on a release for my day job so I don't likely have
time to commit the change just now.

On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 11:28 PM, Daisuke Miyamoto <da...@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi, Ted.
>
> > It should be just as you say.  Can you file an issue at
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAHOUT ?
>
> Thank you for your reviews.
> I created issue MAHOUT-618 with patch.
>
> Regards,
> Daisuke Miyamoto
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Daisuke Miyamoto <da...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I think it should be configured to compile in Java6.
> >> Feel free to point out my mistakes.
> >
> > It should be just as you say.  Can you file an issue at
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAHOUT ?
> > If you can build a tiny patch and attach it to that issue, it would also
> be
> > great!
> >
> >>
> >> Well, as I read internal sources, I may have other questions about
> >> internal of Mahout.
> >> Is it prefer to post this kind of message to mahout-users mailinglist?
> >
> > Either to mahout-users or mahout-dev whichever you think is most
> > appropriate.  We would love to hear what you have to say.
>

Re: JDK requirement for mahout-math

Posted by Daisuke Miyamoto <da...@gmail.com>.
Hi, Ted.

> It should be just as you say.  Can you file an issue at
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAHOUT ?

Thank you for your reviews.
I created issue MAHOUT-618 with patch.

Regards,
Daisuke Miyamoto


On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Daisuke Miyamoto <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I think it should be configured to compile in Java6.
>> Feel free to point out my mistakes.
>
> It should be just as you say.  Can you file an issue at
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAHOUT ?
> If you can build a tiny patch and attach it to that issue, it would also be
> great!
>
>>
>> Well, as I read internal sources, I may have other questions about
>> internal of Mahout.
>> Is it prefer to post this kind of message to mahout-users mailinglist?
>
> Either to mahout-users or mahout-dev whichever you think is most
> appropriate.  We would love to hear what you have to say.

Re: JDK requirement for mahout-math

Posted by Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Daisuke Miyamoto <da...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think it should be configured to compile in Java6.
> Feel free to point out my mistakes.
>

It should be just as you say.  Can you file an issue at
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAHOUT ?

If you can build a tiny patch and attach it to that issue, it would also be
great!


> Well, as I read internal sources, I may have other questions about
> internal of Mahout.
> Is it prefer to post this kind of message to mahout-users mailinglist?
>

Either to mahout-users or mahout-dev whichever you think is most
appropriate.  We would love to hear what you have to say.