mahout-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Mahout - Pig Hackday
Date Thu, 03 May 2012 04:34:58 GMT
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Jake Mannix <jake.mannix@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 8:07 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Making a pig module for mahout is a fine idea.  The twitter guys may have
> > something better, though, so we should explore that as well.  Andy's
> > comments make that possibility very interesting.
> >
>
> What I'd want to suggest is that anyone who wants to move rapidly on
> pig/mahout
> integration should start a github repo which doesn't directly inject itself
> into mahout,
> but stands separately for now, but then the maven dependency DAG rears its
> ugly head:
>
>  pig-vector depends on mahout-core
>
> so if we *do* want to start writing cool stuff *in mahout* which depends on
> it,
>

I think that we are fine if we just create a pig module in mahout.  It can
depend on the external stuff and mahout-core.  That would be the natural
time and place to put the fancy pig-vector-ish stuff anyway.

So I am not worried about this.  We would have separation of mahout-pig
stuff from mahout-core-ish stuff and all should be fine.



> we're circularly dependently self-destruct.  Now, if we had a proper
> mahout-writables
> maven module (*ahem*!), which had all the stuff pig-vector needed, and
> mahout-core
> depended on this, then mahout-core (or mahout-examples) could still depend
> on
> pig-vector (or something like it, like the elephant-bird-loaders slim dep)
> at some
> point.
>

I would rather not have Mahout depend on unreleased github stuff.  If it is
good enough to depend on, it is good enough to suck into the main
deliverable.

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message