[VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
21 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

Gilles Sadowski
Hi.

This is a [VOTE] for releasing Apache Commons RNG 1.0 (from RC2).

Tag name:
   RNG_1_0_RC2 (signature can be checked from git using 'git tag -v')

Tag URL:
   
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-rng.git;a=commit;h=412ffb37932c45d7664eb83bd540f81d27a02b84

Commit ID the tag points at:
   412ffb37932c45d7664eb83bd540f81d27a02b84

Site:
   http://home.apache.org/~erans/commons-rng-1.0-RC2-site

Distribution files:
   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/rng/

Distribution files hashes (SHA1):
    eb947802b687835983803147cfc0e51be97ae521
commons-rng-1.0-bin.tar.gz.sha1
    200840fb29abd126ce9b046549cff04fda4f151a
commons-rng-1.0-bin.zip.sha1
    b872f12f68de7d9f929299badf0d0ddcc835bbf3
commons-rng-1.0-src.tar.gz.sha1
    31e6d6a5973b37904e2646675bd0c9beaa6c301f
commons-rng-1.0-src.zip.sha1

KEYS file to check signatures:
   http://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS

Maven artifacts:
   
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1201/org/apache/commons/commons-rng/1.0/

[ ] +1 Release it.
[ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
[ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches: ...
[ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...

This vote will close in 72 hours, at 2016-09-20T00:00:00Z (this is UTC
time).
----------

Thanks,
Gilles


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

Emmanuel Bourg-3
Le 16/09/2016 à 23:46, Gilles a écrit :

> [X] -1 No, do not release it because ...

-1 due to the design concerns I mentioned in the RC1 thread.

Emmanuel Bourg

(there is a typo on the main page java.lang.Random -> java.util.Random)



signature.asc (851 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

Gilles Sadowski
On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 01:49:22 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 16/09/2016 à 23:46, Gilles a écrit :
>
>> [X] -1 No, do not release it because ...
>
> -1 due to the design concerns I mentioned in the RC1 thread.

Sorry, but none of them warrant a -1.

> Emmanuel Bourg
>
> (there is a typo on the main page java.lang.Random ->
> java.util.Random)

Oops; thanks.  Fixed in "master".


Gilles


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

Dave Brosius
In reply to this post by Gilles Sadowski
+1


On 09/16/2016 05:46 PM, Gilles wrote:

> Hi.
>
> This is a [VOTE] for releasing Apache Commons RNG 1.0 (from RC2).
>
> Tag name:
>   RNG_1_0_RC2 (signature can be checked from git using 'git tag -v')
>
> Tag URL:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-rng.git;a=commit;h=412ffb37932c45d7664eb83bd540f81d27a02b84
>
> Commit ID the tag points at:
>   412ffb37932c45d7664eb83bd540f81d27a02b84
>
> Site:
>   http://home.apache.org/~erans/commons-rng-1.0-RC2-site
>
> Distribution files:
>   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/rng/
>
> Distribution files hashes (SHA1):
>    eb947802b687835983803147cfc0e51be97ae521
> commons-rng-1.0-bin.tar.gz.sha1
>    200840fb29abd126ce9b046549cff04fda4f151a commons-rng-1.0-bin.zip.sha1
>    b872f12f68de7d9f929299badf0d0ddcc835bbf3
> commons-rng-1.0-src.tar.gz.sha1
>    31e6d6a5973b37904e2646675bd0c9beaa6c301f commons-rng-1.0-src.zip.sha1
>
> KEYS file to check signatures:
>   http://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
>
> Maven artifacts:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1201/org/apache/commons/commons-rng/1.0/
>
> [ ] +1 Release it.
> [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches: ...
> [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...
>
> This vote will close in 72 hours, at 2016-09-20T00:00:00Z (this is UTC
> time).
> ----------
>
> Thanks,
> Gilles
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

Artem Barger
+1

Отправлено с iPhone

> 17 сент. 2016 г., в 6:10, Dave Brosius <[hidden email]> написал(а):
>
> +1
>
>
>> On 09/16/2016 05:46 PM, Gilles wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> This is a [VOTE] for releasing Apache Commons RNG 1.0 (from RC2).
>>
>> Tag name:
>>  RNG_1_0_RC2 (signature can be checked from git using 'git tag -v')
>>
>> Tag URL:
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-rng.git;a=commit;h=412ffb37932c45d7664eb83bd540f81d27a02b84
>>
>> Commit ID the tag points at:
>>  412ffb37932c45d7664eb83bd540f81d27a02b84
>>
>> Site:
>>  http://home.apache.org/~erans/commons-rng-1.0-RC2-site
>>
>> Distribution files:
>>  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/rng/
>>
>> Distribution files hashes (SHA1):
>>   eb947802b687835983803147cfc0e51be97ae521 commons-rng-1.0-bin.tar.gz.sha1
>>   200840fb29abd126ce9b046549cff04fda4f151a commons-rng-1.0-bin.zip.sha1
>>   b872f12f68de7d9f929299badf0d0ddcc835bbf3 commons-rng-1.0-src.tar.gz.sha1
>>   31e6d6a5973b37904e2646675bd0c9beaa6c301f commons-rng-1.0-src.zip.sha1
>>
>> KEYS file to check signatures:
>>  http://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
>>
>> Maven artifacts:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1201/org/apache/commons/commons-rng/1.0/
>>
>> [ ] +1 Release it.
>> [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
>> [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches: ...
>> [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...
>>
>> This vote will close in 72 hours, at 2016-09-20T00:00:00Z (this is UTC
>> time).
>> ----------
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Gilles
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

Emmanuel Bourg-3
In reply to this post by Gilles Sadowski
Le 17/09/2016 à 04:26, Gilles a écrit :

> Sorry, but none of them warrant a -1.

You are free to completely ignore my feedback as you currently do, but
you can't claim that my concerns doesn't warrant a -1. The API is
immature and should not be released as 1.0. And if you are not listening
don't complain that you are alone.

Emmanuel Bourg


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

Gilles Sadowski
On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 10:53:42 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 17/09/2016 à 04:26, Gilles a écrit :
>
>> Sorry, but none of them warrant a -1.
>
> You are free to completely ignore my feedback as you currently do,

Please don't pretend that I do that.
Ignore means not replying.
I never ignored any feedback.

Is it OK to not agree with your feeling that the code is not
ready for a release?

> but
> you can't claim that my concerns doesn't warrant a -1. The API is
> immature and should not be released as 1.0.

My impression is that you use "immature" and "not ready
for release" in a self-referential way.

The API is
  * UniformRandomProvider
     Interface with 10 methods named according to usage in
     the Java world ("java.util.Random").
  * RandomSource
     Factory class with 9 public methods.

Everything is fully documented design-wise and usage-wise.

Usage is simple.
Contributing is simple.

You should not tag this code "immature" because you have
the impression (there is nothing more) that you can make
something better (but didn't do it for lack of time).

> And if you are not listening
> don't complain that you are alone.

It's a pity that I could not convince you with a thoroughly
argued email, with repeats of what is already in the docs,
and that you seem to intentionally ignore by summing it all
up with the term "immature".

Did you even use this API?

The ML archives are full of questions of mine that could have
elicited valuable feedback.
You did not provide any; it's then a not totally unexpected
consequence that the development departed from what would
have perhaps looked more natural to you.

It does not mean that it is bad, and should be thrown to
the bin only because it feels weird to a newcomer (you).

Your behaviour is in blatant contradiction with the Apache
motto, and this project's chair mantra (RERO), which is
truly ignored by the facts.

I'm all ears for setting up plans for further breaking up
Commons Math into manageable components, such as "rng-utils"
(where you can experiment with all sorts of syntactic sugar
if the core API bothers you so much).

But these ideas have been up for months, too, and not a
single PMC member did anything constructive about it, in
one way[1] or another[2]; so that the report to the board
had to mention that the CM problem has not be dealt with.

There is more serious work to do[3] rather than nit-picking
about Commons RNG.[4]

Regards,
Gilles

[1] Work with me towards modularity.
[2] Prepare a new release of the whole of CM, which implies
     resolving the backlog of issues).
[3] If you see what I mean...
[4] Good or bad, only time will tell.

> Emmanuel Bourg
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

Gilles Sadowski
In reply to this post by Emmanuel Bourg-3
On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 01:49:22 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 16/09/2016 à 23:46, Gilles a écrit :
>
>> [X] -1 No, do not release it because ...
>
> -1 due to the design concerns I mentioned in the RC1 thread.

FTR

Your observations relevant to the vote have been taken into
account for RC2.

Gilles

>
> Emmanuel Bourg
>
> (there is a typo on the main page java.lang.Random ->
> java.util.Random)


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

Jörg Schaible
In reply to this post by Gilles Sadowski
+1

builds for my compiler zoo from source from version 1.7 to 1.9 under Linux.
Builds for 1.6 JDKs have to be made using a profile, but build incl. tests
succeed then.

Cheers,
Jörg

Gilles wrote:

> Hi.
>
> This is a [VOTE] for releasing Apache Commons RNG 1.0 (from RC2).
>
> Tag name:
>    RNG_1_0_RC2 (signature can be checked from git using 'git tag -v')
>
> Tag URL:
>    
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-rng.git;a=commit;h=412ffb37932c45d7664eb83bd540f81d27a02b84
>
> Commit ID the tag points at:
>    412ffb37932c45d7664eb83bd540f81d27a02b84
>
> Site:
>    http://home.apache.org/~erans/commons-rng-1.0-RC2-site
>
> Distribution files:
>    https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/commons/rng/
>
> Distribution files hashes (SHA1):
>     eb947802b687835983803147cfc0e51be97ae521
> commons-rng-1.0-bin.tar.gz.sha1
>     200840fb29abd126ce9b046549cff04fda4f151a
> commons-rng-1.0-bin.zip.sha1
>     b872f12f68de7d9f929299badf0d0ddcc835bbf3
> commons-rng-1.0-src.tar.gz.sha1
>     31e6d6a5973b37904e2646675bd0c9beaa6c301f
> commons-rng-1.0-src.zip.sha1
>
> KEYS file to check signatures:
>    http://www.apache.org/dist/commons/KEYS
>
> Maven artifacts:
>    
>
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecommons-1201/org/apache/commons/commons-rng/1.0/

>
> [ ] +1 Release it.
> [ ] +0 Go ahead; I don't care.
> [ ] -0 There are a few minor glitches: ...
> [ ] -1 No, do not release it because ...
>
> This vote will close in 72 hours, at 2016-09-20T00:00:00Z (this is UTC
> time).
> ----------
>
> Thanks,
> Gilles



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

Emmanuel Bourg-3
In reply to this post by Gilles Sadowski
Le 17/09/2016 à 13:34, Gilles a écrit :

> Your behaviour is in blatant contradiction with the Apache
> motto, and this project's chair mantra (RERO), which is
> truly ignored by the facts.

RERO isn't the Apache motto (and I'm not opposed to a release, I'm
opposed to declaring the current code as final and well polished).

Apache is actually focused on consensus and collaborative work, your
behavior goes against that.


> [1] Work with me towards modularity.

No thanks, I'm not interested in working with someone not open to
others' views. If even formatting a table properly is an issue for you
there is little I can do.

Emmanuel Bourg


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

garydgregory
Hi All,

Gilles: I can see you are frustrated by the late comments and opinions when
the code has been sitting in the repo for all to see. I hope we can resolve
all of this amicably.

All: We have only one shot at 1.0, this will set the tone for a 1.x line.
If things change/mature/break enough then it becomes 2.0, but if it happens
too soon, then it might give the impression that our process is not mature.

It seems we have a difference of opinion as to whether the current code is
ready for 1.0.

Now that we have both sides engaged in this discussion, we can try to
resolve these differences in email agreements or in code changes. Maybe the
-1 party could create Jiras to address specific issues, or should all this
happen on the ML?

From my experience, when I or someone finds any problem with an RC I
rolled, I sigh, cancel, and redo; but not before complaining to myself that
if there where not 50 steps to do a release, it would be less of a pain.

Gary

On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Emmanuel Bourg <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Le 17/09/2016 à 13:34, Gilles a écrit :
>
> > Your behaviour is in blatant contradiction with the Apache
> > motto, and this project's chair mantra (RERO), which is
> > truly ignored by the facts.
>
> RERO isn't the Apache motto (and I'm not opposed to a release, I'm
> opposed to declaring the current code as final and well polished).
>
> Apache is actually focused on consensus and collaborative work, your
> behavior goes against that.
>
>
> > [1] Work with me towards modularity.
>
> No thanks, I'm not interested in working with someone not open to
> others' views. If even formatting a table properly is an issue for you
> there is little I can do.
>
> Emmanuel Bourg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


--
E-Mail: [hidden email] | [hidden email]
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

Matt Sicker
On 17 September 2016 at 11:13, Gary Gregory <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> From my experience, when I or someone finds any problem with an RC I
> rolled, I sigh, cancel, and redo; but not before complaining to myself that
> if there where not 50 steps to do a release, it would be less of a pain.
>

Is there a jira issue to address this? Or is it just spread across TODO
comments in shell scripts right now?

--
Matt Sicker <[hidden email]>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

garydgregory
On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Matt Sicker <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 17 September 2016 at 11:13, Gary Gregory <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > From my experience, when I or someone finds any problem with an RC I
> > rolled, I sigh, cancel, and redo; but not before complaining to myself
> that
> > if there where not 50 steps to do a release, it would be less of a pain.
> >
>
> Is there a jira issue to address this? Or is it just spread across TODO
> comments in shell scripts right now?
>

Shell scripts? Jiras? Nah, everyone seems to roll their own process based
on a combination of the site pages [1] and wiki pages like "Using Nexus"
[2]. In addition, IIRC, some components have their own scripts and
specialized instructions. The site instructions are updated from time to
time, like instructions now that we have both git and svn in the picture.

IMO, some of the length of the process is due to the fact that we publish
binaries to BOTH our Nexus repository and to another set of folders. This
seems redundant IMO, one place for should be enough.

Gary

[1] https://commons.apache.org/releases/index.html
[2] https://wiki.apache.org/commons/UsingNexus



>
> --
> Matt Sicker <[hidden email]>
>



--
E-Mail: [hidden email] | [hidden email]
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

Gilles Sadowski
In reply to this post by Emmanuel Bourg-3
On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 17:28:19 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 17/09/2016 à 13:34, Gilles a écrit :
>
>> Your behaviour is in blatant contradiction with the Apache
>> motto, and this project's chair mantra (RERO), which is
>> truly ignored by the facts.
>
> RERO isn't the Apache motto

I didn't mean that it was; there were separate arguments in
the above sentence:
  1. "Those who do the work get to decide..." (Apache)
  2. RERO (Gregory)

> (and I'm not opposed to a release, I'm
> opposed to declaring the current code as final and well polished).

Nobody can tell that it is final.
I didn't tell it (I should stop repeating myself).

On the other hand, I do consider it well polished, much more so
than many components, and in particular Commons Math which were
released nonetheless.
[Cf. JIRA and archives for shortcomings in "o.a.c.m.random".
Oh no, repeating myself, again...]

You came months late with remarks that show that you did not
follow the development.
It is fine; you did not have the time.
But then, do not assume that your proposals were not considered
long ago, and then, that some other constraints may have required
(IMO) to select another option.  [Check the log (in the Commons
Math repository.]

It was fine of you to try and help by raising your concerns,
less so to derail a long announced (on JIRA, and on the ML)
release after I answered all of them (even if not to your
satisfaction).

> Apache is actually focused on consensus and collaborative work, your
> behavior goes against that.

Sigh.

And the rest, I'd rather not comment...


Gilles

>> [1] Work with me towards modularity.
>
> No thanks, I'm not interested in working with someone not open to
> others' views. If even formatting a table properly is an issue for
> you
> there is little I can do.
>
> Emmanuel Bourg
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

Gilles Sadowski
In reply to this post by Emmanuel Bourg-3

I can't help it!
I'll comment...

On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 17:28:19 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 17/09/2016 à 13:34, Gilles a écrit :
>
>> [...]
>
>
>> [1] Work with me towards modularity.
>
> No thanks, I'm not interested in working with someone not open to
> others' views.

Try me.  Really.
What is your plan toward modularization?

I've exposed mine, let's see yours.

Gilles

> If even formatting a table properly is an issue for you
> there is little I can do.
>
> Emmanuel Bourg
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

Oliver Heger-3
In reply to this post by garydgregory


Am 17.09.2016 um 18:13 schrieb Gary Gregory:

> Hi All,
>
> Gilles: I can see you are frustrated by the late comments and opinions when
> the code has been sitting in the repo for all to see. I hope we can resolve
> all of this amicably.
>
> All: We have only one shot at 1.0, this will set the tone for a 1.x line.
> If things change/mature/break enough then it becomes 2.0, but if it happens
> too soon, then it might give the impression that our process is not mature.
>
> It seems we have a difference of opinion as to whether the current code is
> ready for 1.0.
>
> Now that we have both sides engaged in this discussion, we can try to
> resolve these differences in email agreements or in code changes. Maybe the
> -1 party could create Jiras to address specific issues, or should all this
> happen on the ML?

Currently only Gilles responded to the proposals of Emmanuel. I would
also be interested in the PoV of the other developers.

Oliver

>
> From my experience, when I or someone finds any problem with an RC I
> rolled, I sigh, cancel, and redo; but not before complaining to myself that
> if there where not 50 steps to do a release, it would be less of a pain.
>
> Gary
>
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Emmanuel Bourg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Le 17/09/2016 à 13:34, Gilles a écrit :
>>
>>> Your behaviour is in blatant contradiction with the Apache
>>> motto, and this project's chair mantra (RERO), which is
>>> truly ignored by the facts.
>>
>> RERO isn't the Apache motto (and I'm not opposed to a release, I'm
>> opposed to declaring the current code as final and well polished).
>>
>> Apache is actually focused on consensus and collaborative work, your
>> behavior goes against that.
>>
>>
>>> [1] Work with me towards modularity.
>>
>> No thanks, I'm not interested in working with someone not open to
>> others' views. If even formatting a table properly is an issue for you
>> there is little I can do.
>>
>> Emmanuel Bourg
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>>
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

Mark Thomas
In reply to this post by Gilles Sadowski
On 18/09/2016 12:51, Gilles wrote:

> On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 17:28:19 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>> Le 17/09/2016 à 13:34, Gilles a écrit :
>>
>>> Your behaviour is in blatant contradiction with the Apache
>>> motto, and this project's chair mantra (RERO), which is
>>> truly ignored by the facts.
>>
>> RERO isn't the Apache motto
>
> I didn't mean that it was; there were separate arguments in
> the above sentence:
>  1. "Those who do the work get to decide..." (Apache)
>  2. RERO (Gregory)

RERO might not be an official Apache motto but it certainly what is
expected in a well functioning Apache project.

Mark


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

Emmanuel Bourg-3
In reply to this post by Gilles Sadowski
Le 18/09/2016 à 13:57, Gilles a écrit :

>
> I can't help it!
> I'll comment...
>
> On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 17:28:19 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>
> Try me.  Really.
> What is your plan toward modularization?
>
> I've exposed mine, let's see yours.

I can't help it either, I'm a nice guy. I have no strong opinion on the
modularization of RNG. Intuitively, considering the size of the original
code coming from the random package in Commons Math I feel that a
separate module is probably not necessary. But I haven't examined your
proposal thoroughly yet.

Emmanuel Bourg


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0

Dave Brosius-2

Let's release RNG 1.0. If our customers see areas of improvements with
regard to modularization, i'm sure they will let us know. But it seems
to me this code base is fine for a 1.0 release. Release early and often.

--dave


On 09/18/2016 12:24 PM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:

> Le 18/09/2016 à 13:57, Gilles a écrit :
>> I can't help it!
>> I'll comment...
>>
>> On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 17:28:19 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>>
>> Try me.  Really.
>> What is your plan toward modularization?
>>
>> I've exposed mine, let's see yours.
> I can't help it either, I'm a nice guy. I have no strong opinion on the
> modularization of RNG. Intuitively, considering the size of the original
> code coming from the random package in Commons Math I feel that a
> separate module is probably not necessary. But I haven't examined your
> proposal thoroughly yet.
>
> Emmanuel Bourg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Math] Modularization (Was: Re: [VOTE][RC2] Release "Apache Commons RNG" version 1.0)

Gilles Sadowski
In reply to this post by Emmanuel Bourg-3
On Sun, 18 Sep 2016 18:24:16 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:

> Le 18/09/2016 à 13:57, Gilles a écrit :
>>
>> I can't help it!
>> I'll comment...
>>
>> On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 17:28:19 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>>
>> Try me.  Really.
>> What is your plan toward modularization?
>>
>> I've exposed mine, let's see yours.
>
> I can't help it either, I'm a nice guy. I have no strong opinion on
> the
> modularization of RNG.

I actually meant that I exposed my view about having to
modularize Commons Math; that is, create several Commons
components out of it.

Commons RNG is the module that allowed to factor out much
of the "o.a.c.math4.random" package out of Commons Math.

CM3 "o.a.c.m.random": 2388 lines
CM4 "o.a.c.m.random": 899 lines

[The LOC count also comprises some cleanup not transferred to
RNG (e.g. "RandomDataGenerator", replaced by code in package
"o.a.c.m.distribution").]

RNG "o.a.c.rng": 1842 lines

[With 6 additional generators, "save/restore", seed factory,
and "automatic" seed conversions.]

The next step (IMO) is to create a "Commons RNG-Utils"
component (that depends on "Commons RNG" with, broadly, the
rest of the "random" package, and the "distribution" package
(where the "NormalDistribution" will provide the equivalent
of "nextGaussian", on an equal footing with sampling from any
of the other distributions).
And, for good measure, it could also include the random-related
utilities that now in Commons Lang's "RandomUtils" and
"RandomStringUtils" (which will improve in quality and
performance through a configurable choice of generator).

WDYT?


Gilles

> Intuitively, considering the size of the original
> code coming from the random package in Commons Math I feel that a
> separate module is probably not necessary. But I haven't examined
> your
> proposal thoroughly yet.
>
> Emmanuel Bourg
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

12