Hello Sébastien.
>
> >
> > More than 60 issues have been resolved since the release of Commons Math
> > 3.0.
> > I think that it is time to lay out a road map for the next release (3.1),
> > with a target date of early September (at which point, 3.0 will be 6 months
> > old).
> >
> I agree.
>
> >
> > The following issues have been worked on as much as permitted for a minor
> > release (backwards-compatibility) and thus can be considered resolved w.r.t.
> > the 3.1 release:
> > MATH-825
> > MATH-803
> >
> See my comments on MATH-821 below.
>
> >
> > MATH-800
> > MATH-799
> > MATH-784
> >
> The issue is effectively solved, but must remain opened as a reminder until 4.0.
>
> >
> > The following issues are bugs that do not block the 3.1 release (either they
> > are minor or they would require semantic changes that are forbidden, or will
> > be surprising, in a minor release):
> > MATH-821
> >
> I'm waiting for answers on the users ML (see
> http://markmail.org/thread/vu2ulvyt7pseyheq). Maybe august was not the
> best time to launch such a poll. Will try to resend it in early
> september, what do you think?
That's fine. But I doubt that you'll get more answers ;-).
In the mean time, I don't think that we have to solve this for 3.1; it can
be assumed that it is an "unsupported feature with an undefined result".
> > MATH-788
> > MATH-758
> >
> > The following are the more serious issues:
> > MATH-836
> > MATH-828
> > MATH-819
> > MATH-789
> >
> > MATH-778
> >
> Dfp Dfp.multiply(int x) does not comply with the general contract
> FieldElement.multiply(int n)
> This one will have to wait, because the problem is a bit deeper than I
> thought initially. I still need to make a thorough report.
>
> > MATH-740
> > MATH-738
> >
> Incomplete beta function I(x, a, b) is inaccurate for large values of
> a and/or b. I'm working on this one. Not sure I'll be able to give a
> satisfactory answer, but I would like some more time to work on it.
>
> >
> > "Wish" or "improvement" issues that miss a patch should not be blocking the
> > 3.1 release.
> > Some of them are still marked with 3.1 as the target version. Please give
> > your opinion about whether they could be easily implemented in the next few
> > weeks, or should be postponed to release 3.2 or 4.0.
> >
> MATH-820 is fairly easy to implement, but not absolutely necessary. If
> I can find some time, I will happily do that, but otherwise, it can
> wait.
> >
> > Some issues have a large scope and would require a re-design of certain
> > classes (e.g. MATH-765 and related), not to be implemented in a minor
> > release.
> >
> > Please review all issues (especially those assigned to you, or reported by
> > you, or where you took an active part in the discussion) and provide
> > feedback on their "currentness".
So please change the "fix release" items as you see fit.
Thanks,
Gilles
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org