You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@systemml.apache.org by Matthias Boehm <mb...@us.ibm.com> on 2016/07/28 06:09:34 UTC
[DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
Soon, we'll be done with the native frame support and various API changes.
This seems to be a good point in time to create our next 0.11 release. What
do you think? In case the majority is in favor, let's collect the open
features and issues here in this thread.
Regards,
Matthias
Re: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
Posted by Deron Eriksson <de...@gmail.com>.
+1 for quick release cycle
+1 for 2.0 support
+1 for simplified release artifacts
Simplifying the release artifacts could potentially halve the time it
requires for me to validate a release, so I am definitely in favor of that.
I really like the idea of having essentially one or two artifacts that we
can point users to (the standard jar and the tar.gz/zip standalone
artifacts that contain 'everything'). I think this will definitely help
increase adoption, especially if our high-level documentation focuses on
these artifacts.
Deron
On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Niketan Pansare <np...@us.ibm.com>
wrote:
> +1 for quick release cycle and adding 2.0 support.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Niketan Pansare
> IBM Almaden Research Center
> E-mail: npansar At us.ibm.com
> http://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/view.php?person=us-npansar
>
> [image: Inactive hide details for dusenberrymw---07/28/2016 09:17:08
> AM---I'm definitely in favor of releasing as soon as possible, as]dusenberrymw---07/28/2016
> 09:17:08 AM---I'm definitely in favor of releasing as soon as possible, as
> well as moving to quick release cycles.
>
> From: dusenberrymw@gmail.com
> To: dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org
> Date: 07/28/2016 09:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> I'm definitely in favor of releasing as soon as possible, as well as
> moving to quick release cycles. In addition to adding 2.0 support, we
> should also slim down our release artifacts to a single, simple
> distribution (in addition to the required 'source' distribution) to make
> adoption easier.
>
> -Mike
>
> --
>
> Mike Dusenberry
> GitHub: github.com/dusenberrymw
> LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/mikedusenberry
>
> Sent from my iPhone.
>
>
> > On Jul 28, 2016, at 8:26 AM, Glenn Weidner <gw...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > Given that Spark 2.0 is officially released, we should also
> incorporate/verify compatibility with Spark 2.0 for SystemML 0.11 release.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Glenn
> >
> > Berthold Reinwald---07/28/2016 03:42:37 AM---Having a release with
> feature complete frame support is a good idea. API completeness needs to be
> v
> >
> > From: Berthold Reinwald/Almaden/IBM@IBMUS
> > To: dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org
> > Date: 07/28/2016 03:42 AM
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Having a release with feature complete frame support is a good idea. API
> > completeness needs to be verified.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Berthold Reinwald
> > IBM Almaden Research Center
> > office: (408) 927 2208; T/L: 457 2208
> > e-mail: reinwald@us.ibm.com
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Acs S <ac...@yahoo.com.INVALID>
> > To: "dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org"
> > <de...@systemml.incubator.apache.org>
> > Date: 07/28/2016 12:56 AM
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
> >
> >
> >
> > That makes sense.
> > Going forward we should plan on having release at fix interval (+/- few
> > days) with some key features.Probably quarterly release will be one
> > suggestion.
> > -Arvind
> >
> > From: Matthias Boehm <mb...@us.ibm.com>
> > To: dev <de...@systemml.incubator.apache.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 11:09 PM
> > Subject: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
> >
> >
> >
> > Soon, we'll be done with the native frame support and various API
> changes.
> > This seems to be a good point in time to create our next 0.11 release.
> > What
> > do you think? In case the majority is in favor, let's collect the open
> > features and issues here in this thread.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Matthias
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
Posted by Niketan Pansare <np...@us.ibm.com>.
+1 for quick release cycle and adding 2.0 support.
Thanks,
Niketan Pansare
IBM Almaden Research Center
E-mail: npansar At us.ibm.com
http://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/view.php?person=us-npansar
From: dusenberrymw@gmail.com
To: dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org
Date: 07/28/2016 09:17 AM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
I'm definitely in favor of releasing as soon as possible, as well as moving
to quick release cycles. In addition to adding 2.0 support, we should also
slim down our release artifacts to a single, simple distribution (in
addition to the required 'source' distribution) to make adoption easier.
-Mike
--
Mike Dusenberry
GitHub: github.com/dusenberrymw
LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/mikedusenberry
Sent from my iPhone.
> On Jul 28, 2016, at 8:26 AM, Glenn Weidner <gw...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Given that Spark 2.0 is officially released, we should also
incorporate/verify compatibility with Spark 2.0 for SystemML 0.11 release.
>
> Thanks,
> Glenn
>
> Berthold Reinwald---07/28/2016 03:42:37 AM---Having a release with
feature complete frame support is a good idea. API completeness needs to be
v
>
> From: Berthold Reinwald/Almaden/IBM@IBMUS
> To: dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org
> Date: 07/28/2016 03:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
>
>
>
>
> Having a release with feature complete frame support is a good idea. API
> completeness needs to be verified.
>
> Regards,
> Berthold Reinwald
> IBM Almaden Research Center
> office: (408) 927 2208; T/L: 457 2208
> e-mail: reinwald@us.ibm.com
>
>
>
> From: Acs S <ac...@yahoo.com.INVALID>
> To: "dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org"
> <de...@systemml.incubator.apache.org>
> Date: 07/28/2016 12:56 AM
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
>
>
>
> That makes sense.
> Going forward we should plan on having release at fix interval (+/- few
> days) with some key features.Probably quarterly release will be one
> suggestion.
> -Arvind
>
> From: Matthias Boehm <mb...@us.ibm.com>
> To: dev <de...@systemml.incubator.apache.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 11:09 PM
> Subject: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
>
>
>
> Soon, we'll be done with the native frame support and various API
changes.
> This seems to be a good point in time to create our next 0.11 release.
> What
> do you think? In case the majority is in favor, let's collect the open
> features and issues here in this thread.
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
Posted by du...@gmail.com.
I'm definitely in favor of releasing as soon as possible, as well as moving to quick release cycles. In addition to adding 2.0 support, we should also slim down our release artifacts to a single, simple distribution (in addition to the required 'source' distribution) to make adoption easier.
-Mike
--
Mike Dusenberry
GitHub: github.com/dusenberrymw
LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/mikedusenberry
Sent from my iPhone.
> On Jul 28, 2016, at 8:26 AM, Glenn Weidner <gw...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Given that Spark 2.0 is officially released, we should also incorporate/verify compatibility with Spark 2.0 for SystemML 0.11 release.
>
> Thanks,
> Glenn
>
> Berthold Reinwald---07/28/2016 03:42:37 AM---Having a release with feature complete frame support is a good idea. API completeness needs to be v
>
> From: Berthold Reinwald/Almaden/IBM@IBMUS
> To: dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org
> Date: 07/28/2016 03:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
>
>
>
>
> Having a release with feature complete frame support is a good idea. API
> completeness needs to be verified.
>
> Regards,
> Berthold Reinwald
> IBM Almaden Research Center
> office: (408) 927 2208; T/L: 457 2208
> e-mail: reinwald@us.ibm.com
>
>
>
> From: Acs S <ac...@yahoo.com.INVALID>
> To: "dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org"
> <de...@systemml.incubator.apache.org>
> Date: 07/28/2016 12:56 AM
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
>
>
>
> That makes sense.
> Going forward we should plan on having release at fix interval (+/- few
> days) with some key features.Probably quarterly release will be one
> suggestion.
> -Arvind
>
> From: Matthias Boehm <mb...@us.ibm.com>
> To: dev <de...@systemml.incubator.apache.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 11:09 PM
> Subject: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
>
>
>
> Soon, we'll be done with the native frame support and various API changes.
> This seems to be a good point in time to create our next 0.11 release.
> What
> do you think? In case the majority is in favor, let's collect the open
> features and issues here in this thread.
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
Posted by Glenn Weidner <gw...@us.ibm.com>.
Given that Spark 2.0 is officially released, we should also
incorporate/verify compatibility with Spark 2.0 for SystemML 0.11 release.
Thanks,
Glenn
From: Berthold Reinwald/Almaden/IBM@IBMUS
To: dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org
Date: 07/28/2016 03:42 AM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
Having a release with feature complete frame support is a good idea. API
completeness needs to be verified.
Regards,
Berthold Reinwald
IBM Almaden Research Center
office: (408) 927 2208; T/L: 457 2208
e-mail: reinwald@us.ibm.com
From: Acs S <ac...@yahoo.com.INVALID>
To: "dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org"
<de...@systemml.incubator.apache.org>
Date: 07/28/2016 12:56 AM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
That makes sense.
Going forward we should plan on having release at fix interval (+/- few
days) with some key features.Probably quarterly release will be one
suggestion.
-Arvind
From: Matthias Boehm <mb...@us.ibm.com>
To: dev <de...@systemml.incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 11:09 PM
Subject: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
Soon, we'll be done with the native frame support and various API changes.
This seems to be a good point in time to create our next 0.11 release.
What
do you think? In case the majority is in favor, let's collect the open
features and issues here in this thread.
Regards,
Matthias
Re: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
Posted by Berthold Reinwald <re...@us.ibm.com>.
Having a release with feature complete frame support is a good idea. API
completeness needs to be verified.
Regards,
Berthold Reinwald
IBM Almaden Research Center
office: (408) 927 2208; T/L: 457 2208
e-mail: reinwald@us.ibm.com
From: Acs S <ac...@yahoo.com.INVALID>
To: "dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org"
<de...@systemml.incubator.apache.org>
Date: 07/28/2016 12:56 AM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
That makes sense.
Going forward we should plan on having release at fix interval (+/- few
days) with some key features.Probably quarterly release will be one
suggestion.
-Arvind
From: Matthias Boehm <mb...@us.ibm.com>
To: dev <de...@systemml.incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 11:09 PM
Subject: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
Soon, we'll be done with the native frame support and various API changes.
This seems to be a good point in time to create our next 0.11 release.
What
do you think? In case the majority is in favor, let's collect the open
features and issues here in this thread.
Regards,
Matthias
Re: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
Posted by Acs S <ac...@yahoo.com.INVALID>.
That makes sense.
Going forward we should plan on having release at fix interval (+/- few days) with some key features.Probably quarterly release will be one suggestion.
-Arvind
From: Matthias Boehm <mb...@us.ibm.com>
To: dev <de...@systemml.incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 11:09 PM
Subject: [DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release
Soon, we'll be done with the native frame support and various API changes.
This seems to be a good point in time to create our next 0.11 release. What
do you think? In case the majority is in favor, let's collect the open
features and issues here in this thread.
Regards,
Matthias