You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Luc Maisonobe <Lu...@free.fr> on 2010/01/24 11:47:31 UTC
[math] moving towards 2.1 release ?
Hello,
I wonder if we should release 2.1 soon. There have been many bugs fixed,
but there are still many bugs waiting for a fix. I know at least two
projects that are waiting for a new release.
I have closed or postponed a few issues. Considering the 9 issues
scheduled for 2.1, some of them could be postponed once again to
post-2.1 or perhaps even closed as WON'T FIX (MATH-194, MATH-195 and
perhaps MATH-228). A few other are on the way to be solved (MATH-323,
MATH-297 which could be considerd resolved and another issue created for
the multiple singular values problem I identified in the last comments,
depending on Dimitri's work on SVD). MATH-296 could probably be resolved
as proposed in the next to last comment by Phil.
What do other think about this ?
Luc
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
RE: [math] moving towards 2.1 release ?
Posted by Larry Diamond <la...@hotmail.com>.
Hi. On MATH-323 (SemiVariance), I updated the code submission as we discussed.
Please take a look - I think it's at a point where it can be reviewed for inclusion.
Please let me know what you think
Thank you very much
Larry Diamond
> Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 11:47:31 +0100
> From: Luc.Maisonobe@free.fr
> To: dev@commons.apache.org
> Subject: [math] moving towards 2.1 release ?
>
> Hello,
>
> I wonder if we should release 2.1 soon. There have been many bugs fixed,
> but there are still many bugs waiting for a fix. I know at least two
> projects that are waiting for a new release.
>
> I have closed or postponed a few issues. Considering the 9 issues
> scheduled for 2.1, some of them could be postponed once again to
> post-2.1 or perhaps even closed as WON'T FIX (MATH-194, MATH-195 and
> perhaps MATH-228). A few other are on the way to be solved (MATH-323,
> MATH-297 which could be considerd resolved and another issue created for
> the multiple singular values problem I identified in the last comments,
> depending on Dimitri's work on SVD). MATH-296 could probably be resolved
> as proposed in the next to last comment by Phil.
>
> What do other think about this ?
>
> Luc
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/196390708/direct/01/
Re: [math] moving towards 2.1 release ?
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I wonder if we should release 2.1 soon. There have been many bugs fixed,
> but there are still many bugs waiting for a fix. I know at least two
> projects that are waiting for a new release.
+1 for getting 2.1 out ASAP. I was thinking of proposing a 2.0.1
just to bundle the bug fixes, but that would be a little tricky to
package and the plan below should not - famous last words - take to
long, so I say go for it.
>
> I have closed or postponed a few issues. Considering the 9 issues
> scheduled for 2.1, some of them could be postponed once again to
> post-2.1 or perhaps even closed as WON'T FIX (MATH-194, MATH-195 and
> perhaps MATH-228).
+1 for pushing 194, 195, 228 out.
A few other are on the way to be solved (MATH-323,
Will get 323 in shortly.
> MATH-297 which could be considerd resolved and another issue created for
> the multiple singular values problem I identified in the last comments,
> depending on Dimitri's work on SVD). MATH-296 could probably be resolved
> as proposed in the next to last comment by Phil.
Agree on 296.
I am working on 282. I am finding problems with NaN values returned
by regularizedGammaP and Q and some suboptimality in the decision
criteria for which of these to use. I would like to get a fix for
282 into 2.1. Would appreciate other eyeballs on this issue. Once
I finish the pending [dbcp] release, I will add comments to the
ticket summarizing what I have learned.
I will RM if no one else wants to; but I will also volunteer to
write a release-process.txt, similar to what I did for [dbcp] so
others can share in the fun. I had to do some trickery in 2.0 to
get just the userguide bundled with the binary distribution. I need
to doc that in any case.
Thanks for pushing this along.
Phil
>
> What do other think about this ?
>
> Luc
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org