You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@mahout.apache.org by Jeff Eastman <jd...@windwardsolutions.com> on 2012/05/22 18:33:54 UTC
[VOTE] Mahout 0.7
We still have 11 open issues that are preventing us from entering code
freeze. Of these, 6 are marked as low priority and only one is marked as
critical. Do we want to:
A - punt all non-critical issues to 0.8
B - punt all low priority issues to 0.8 and wait for the others to be
resolved
C - punt all open issues to 0.8 and get on with the release
D - delay the target date for code freeze until 1 June and reassess then
Jeff
Re: [VOTE] Mahout 0.7
Posted by Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com>.
I think that we should do D.
The primary action that we should take before then is to resolve trivial
issues. For instance, MAHOUT-399 can be marked WONT_FIX.
[image: Bug]MAHOUT-399 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAHOUT-399>
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAHOUT-399>Due Date: 25/Mar/11LDA
on Mahout 0.3 does not converge to correct solution for overlapping
pyramids toy problem.
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 6:30 PM, tom pierce <tc...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1 for D. Many of those seem like worthwhile improvements, and if a week
> or so allows a few to get resolved, that seems like a good tradeoff to me.
>
> I'd be inclined to vote C (or maybe A) on 6/1, though.
>
> -t
>
>
>
>
> On 05/22/2012 12:33 PM, Jeff Eastman wrote:
>
>>
>> A - punt all non-critical issues to 0.8
>> B - punt all low priority issues to 0.8 and wait for the others to be
>> resolved
>> C - punt all open issues to 0.8 and get on with the release
>> D - delay the target date for code freeze until 1 June and reassess then
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Mahout 0.7
Posted by tom pierce <tc...@apache.org>.
+1 for D. Many of those seem like worthwhile improvements, and if a
week or so allows a few to get resolved, that seems like a good tradeoff
to me.
I'd be inclined to vote C (or maybe A) on 6/1, though.
-t
On 05/22/2012 12:33 PM, Jeff Eastman wrote:
>
> A - punt all non-critical issues to 0.8
> B - punt all low priority issues to 0.8 and wait for the others to be
> resolved
> C - punt all open issues to 0.8 and get on with the release
> D - delay the target date for code freeze until 1 June and reassess then
>
> Jeff
Re: [VOTE] Mahout 0.7
Posted by Isabel Drost <is...@apache.org>.
Voting for B with no objections to others as well. For anything other than
issues that are showstoppers for our users I'd like to see us release rather
sooner than later (and more frequently in the long-term).
Isabel
On 23.05.2012 Sean Owen wrote:
> I suppose I vote for B with no objections to others.
>
> On May 23, 2012 12:48 PM, "Grant Ingersoll" <gs...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On May 22, 2012, at 12:33 PM, Jeff Eastman wrote:
> > > We still have 11 open issues that are preventing us from entering code
> >
> > freeze. Of these, 6 are marked as low priority and only one is marked as
> >
> > critical. Do we want to:
> > > A - punt all non-critical issues to 0.8
> > > B - punt all low priority issues to 0.8 and wait for the others to be
> >
> > resolved
> >
> > > C - punt all open issues to 0.8 and get on with the release
> > > D - delay the target date for code freeze until 1 June and reassess
> > > then
> >
> > Sorry for being out on this one, as I've had a rather large deadline at
> > work. My vote is for D.
Re: [VOTE] Mahout 0.7
Posted by Sean Owen <sr...@gmail.com>.
I suppose I vote for B with no objections to others.
On May 23, 2012 12:48 PM, "Grant Ingersoll" <gs...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On May 22, 2012, at 12:33 PM, Jeff Eastman wrote:
>
> > We still have 11 open issues that are preventing us from entering code
> freeze. Of these, 6 are marked as low priority and only one is marked as
> critical. Do we want to:
> >
> > A - punt all non-critical issues to 0.8
> > B - punt all low priority issues to 0.8 and wait for the others to be
> resolved
> > C - punt all open issues to 0.8 and get on with the release
> > D - delay the target date for code freeze until 1 June and reassess then
> >
>
> Sorry for being out on this one, as I've had a rather large deadline at
> work. My vote is for D.
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Mahout 0.7
Posted by Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org>.
On May 30, 2012, at 11:32 AM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> I am sorry to be missing, but I have had a leethal schedule lately. I will
> have a break next week during/around Buzzwords.
I'm pretty much in the same boat, except it doesn't let up until the 16th. I punted a few of my issues to 0.8, but I am about to commit M-848.
-Grant
Re: [VOTE] Mahout 0.7
Posted by Dmitriy Lyubimov <dl...@gmail.com>.
It seems like there's some critical stuff there. Since 0.7 is billed
as a maintenance release, it makes sense to resolve the maintenance
and "fix" issues. A. Definitely punt all "feature like" issues.
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am sorry to be missing, but I have had a leethal schedule lately. I will
> have a break next week during/around Buzzwords.
>
> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Jeff Eastman <jd...@windwardsolutions.com>wrote:
>
>> June 1 is day after tomorrow and we are not making progress on any of the
>> outstanding JIRAs. Testing sentiment again on 0.7...
>>
>>
>> On 5/23/12 7:48 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>>
>>> On May 22, 2012, at 12:33 PM, Jeff Eastman wrote:
>>>
>>> We still have 11 open issues that are preventing us from entering code
>>>> freeze. Of these, 6 are marked as low priority and only one is marked as
>>>> critical. Do we want to:
>>>>
>>>> A - punt all non-critical issues to 0.8
>>>> B - punt all low priority issues to 0.8 and wait for the others to be
>>>> resolved
>>>> C - punt all open issues to 0.8 and get on with the release
>>>> D - delay the target date for code freeze until 1 June and reassess then
>>>>
>>>> Sorry for being out on this one, as I've had a rather large deadline at
>>> work. My vote is for D.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Mahout 0.7
Posted by Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com>.
I am sorry to be missing, but I have had a leethal schedule lately. I will
have a break next week during/around Buzzwords.
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Jeff Eastman <jd...@windwardsolutions.com>wrote:
> June 1 is day after tomorrow and we are not making progress on any of the
> outstanding JIRAs. Testing sentiment again on 0.7...
>
>
> On 5/23/12 7:48 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>
>> On May 22, 2012, at 12:33 PM, Jeff Eastman wrote:
>>
>> We still have 11 open issues that are preventing us from entering code
>>> freeze. Of these, 6 are marked as low priority and only one is marked as
>>> critical. Do we want to:
>>>
>>> A - punt all non-critical issues to 0.8
>>> B - punt all low priority issues to 0.8 and wait for the others to be
>>> resolved
>>> C - punt all open issues to 0.8 and get on with the release
>>> D - delay the target date for code freeze until 1 June and reassess then
>>>
>>> Sorry for being out on this one, as I've had a rather large deadline at
>> work. My vote is for D.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Mahout 0.7
Posted by Jeff Eastman <jd...@windwardsolutions.com>.
June 1 is day after tomorrow and we are not making progress on any of
the outstanding JIRAs. Testing sentiment again on 0.7...
On 5/23/12 7:48 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> On May 22, 2012, at 12:33 PM, Jeff Eastman wrote:
>
>> We still have 11 open issues that are preventing us from entering code freeze. Of these, 6 are marked as low priority and only one is marked as critical. Do we want to:
>>
>> A - punt all non-critical issues to 0.8
>> B - punt all low priority issues to 0.8 and wait for the others to be resolved
>> C - punt all open issues to 0.8 and get on with the release
>> D - delay the target date for code freeze until 1 June and reassess then
>>
> Sorry for being out on this one, as I've had a rather large deadline at work. My vote is for D.
>
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Mahout 0.7
Posted by Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org>.
On May 22, 2012, at 12:33 PM, Jeff Eastman wrote:
> We still have 11 open issues that are preventing us from entering code freeze. Of these, 6 are marked as low priority and only one is marked as critical. Do we want to:
>
> A - punt all non-critical issues to 0.8
> B - punt all low priority issues to 0.8 and wait for the others to be resolved
> C - punt all open issues to 0.8 and get on with the release
> D - delay the target date for code freeze until 1 June and reassess then
>
Sorry for being out on this one, as I've had a rather large deadline at work. My vote is for D.