I can look later tonight after chores.
With the exception of the PR that I just opened
https://github.com/apache/mahout/pull/297
<https://github.com/apache/mahout/pull/297>
(please review, ^^) <https://github.com/apache/mahout/pull/297> the board
is back to clean..
So we should be close to ready for a new RC After that's out. Could
everybody please take stock for a minute and be sure that everything
questionable to is good to go?
Could someone please double check
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/RapidBoard.jspa?rapidView=149&view=detail&selectedIssue=MAHOUT-1957
and make sure that the pom in question is all set?
If all that's good I think that we're all set.
________________________________
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2017 5:12:46 PM
Subject: Re: New RC?
+1 to a java only RC.. I bumped the issue that I'd created yesterday for
the binaries to 0.13.1, and moved the readme.md issue down from critical
to blocker.
Gonna work on that real quick right now.
________________________________
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2017 3:38:46 PM
Subject: Re: New RC?
Makes sense to me, I canât test the 2 GPU versions. If 0.13.0 that is
java only do we have an RC or code freeze to test?
Or rather if you're both in favor of it.. get the source/java only version
out as 0.13.0 and follow up with automated building g and testing framework
for 0.13.1.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------
Date: 03/18/2017 1:40 PM (GMT-08:00)
Subject: RE: New RC?
Ok.. let's revisit after we get first out the door.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------
Date: 03/18/2017 1:34 PM (GMT-08:00)
Subject: Re: New RC?
That's what I'd prefer too.
Post by Trevor GrantI'm yes and no about that.
Yes- because, yea awesome.
no- bc of limited testing bandwidth.
I'd be more in favor of lets push 0.13.0 with minimal binary support, and
then get IT testing all sured up (MAHOUT-1949) and then do another
release
Post by Trevor Grantsoon, with very little additional code, but add native solvers and spark
2.0/scala 2.11 binaries
e.g. lets just get the current one out the door and then focus on
automation to make future release cycles quicker and less painful.
just my .02
tg
Trevor Grant
Data Scientist
https://github.com/rawkintrevo
http://stackexchange.com/users/3002022/rawkintrevo
http://trevorgrant.org
*"Fortunate is he, who is able to know the causes of things." -Virgil*
Ahh.. thats true.. they should be added in with profiles, so they're
only
Post by Trevor Grantactivated when the distribution is built specifically for them.
ReE: the distribution, I'd like to put three out.. one java only, one
java/OpenMP, and one Java/OpenMP/OpenCL.
________________________________
Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 3:59:48 PM
Subject: Re: New RC?
I didn't realize we had intended to add viennaCl jars to binary
distibution... Cool if we do though.
tg
Trevor Grant
Data Scientist
https://github.com/rawkintrevo
http://stackexchange.com/users/3002022/rawkintrevo
http://trevorgrant.org
*"Fortunate is he, who is able to know the causes of things." -Virgil*
I think we have a few minor changes that we could add (updating
readme.md
eg..).. but more importantly when going through the poms this week, I
noticed that the viennacl jars are not being added to the binary
distribution artifact.
Have not started a jira for it because I'm unsure of the fix, but
I'll
add one shortly.. def a blocker though.. until that is fixed No need
for
an
RC IMO.
Andy
Sent from my Galaxy Tab A
-------- Original message --------
Date: 3/18/17 2:59 PM (GMT-05:00)
Subject: New RC?
Are we cutting a new RC this weekend?
tg
Trevor Grant
Data Scientist
https://github.com/rawkintrevo
http://stackexchange.com/users/3002022/rawkintrevo
http://trevorgrant.org
*"Fortunate is he, who is able to know the causes of things." -Virgil*