commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Al Chou <>
Subject Re: [math] Matrix subMatrix and mean methods
Date Sat, 09 Oct 2004 01:38:41 GMT
--- "Mark R. Diggory" <> wrote:
> Wolfgang Hoschek wrote:
> > Mark,
> > 
> > I am not worried about "fracturing". My understanding is that you 
> > wouldn't start doing colt releases build by apache, right? You'd rather 
> > take some parts or derivatives of the code and add them to commons-math 
> > CVS as you see fit (probably in a significantly refactored/modified 
> > form). I thought that was the overall idea, and it seems to me a good one.
> We have discussed a "Larger" project at Apache that would be more 
> "expansive" than what is currently capable in the "Jakarta Commons". 
> Whether or not such a project takes off has been limited more by 
> uncertainty of what its "boundaries" would be.
> > If all goes well, Colt as an external library could fade into oblivion 
> > in a year or two, or whatever time it takes for math to really shape up. 
> > That's absolutely fine with me.
> Do you suspect that you or CERN will maintain historical archiving of 
> the Colt project indefinitely if it did? This is one of the 
> characteristics of ASF, we maintain historical CVS and distribution 
> archives for all the projects that have existed in Apache. So, if Colt 
> moved into Apache, it would have a long term, canonical archival home 
> for its existence even if it's contents were integrated into Apache 
> Math. If it was not your interest to maintain it any longer, then such 
> an option would be beneficial for the both historical referencing and 
> reusage.
> > 
> > As far as myself as project member/committer: Thanks for the kind 
> > invitation, but I'm really busy with other things these days. However, I 
> > can be there for you in case you'd have questions about how/why things 
> > work "the way they work" in colt. To reach me, please make sure to "cc" 
> > me; commons-dev is a high volume mailing list.
> Of course, we would enjoy any involvement you can provide. I understand 
> your career focus may be in different directions now.
> > I have no particular opinion on (A), it's up to you.
> > 
> > B) sounds confusing to me as it might indicate to users that they should 
> > use that library instead of commons-math. Why have a jakarta level 
> > project if all you want is to take some parts or derivatives of it and 
> > integrate them in "math"?
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Wolfgang.
> > 
> Codebases have been donated to Apache Jakarta in the past which maintain 
> similar capabilities. For instance, Oro and Apache Regexp were projects 
> from different development groups, the code donation was to, in my 
> belief, provide a mechanism to merge these projects at a time in the 
> future, taking the best of both worlds.
> I do adimately believe we would not want to consider releasing a full 
> version of Colt unless you were interested in migrating the entire 
> project into Apache, this is what I mean by fracturing, we do not want 
> to see two separate "Colt" communities competing for membership, this 
> would not be in either of our interests, would confuse the userbase and 
> not allow us to build a "shared" development community.

I agree we should not be releasing Apache versions of the whole Colt library
(which technically wouldn't even be possible, as the hep.aida.* packages are
LGPL'd, not under the the new CERN license).  In any case, the question of the
scope of Commons-Math continually comes up, and the merging in of Colt is yet
another impetus for discussing it.  If we were to include large portions or all
of the CERN-licensed code of Colt, we would be in a position to claim a much
larger scope/charter for the project.  But would we want to?  Some project
members seem very interested in doing so (and I am certainly guilty of such
thoughts), but I don't think it necessarily makes sense.  Commons-Math's
charter is a sound one, and I would not want to alienate/inconvenience users
whose needs are well met by its current scope and charter (assuming there are
any such) by increasing it unnecessarily.  A separate project would probably be
more appropriate if we wanted a larger scope.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message