On Mon, 21 Aug 2017 15:43:30 -0400, Rob Tompkins wrote:
On Aug 21, 2017, at 3:41 PM, Gary Gregory
wrote:
What about this for a compromise: create Commons Math 5 as a
multi-module
project and bring in as submodules only the newly minted components
and
whatever gets spun out of Math 3/4.
Th
That is what I would like to see.
Ralph
> On Aug 21, 2017, at 12:41 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> What about this for a compromise: create Commons Math 5 as a multi-module
> project and bring in as submodules only the newly minted components and
> whatever gets spun out of Math 3/4.
>
> Gary
>
On 21 August 2017 at 21:04, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> We have a request for [CSV] to provide mutable records. There is no clear
> consensus to me on how to do this. The current CSVRecord class is immutable
> but is not documented as such. I attribute that to YAGNI up to now.
>
> Options ra
On Mon, 21 Aug 2017 10:52:28 -0700, Ralph Goers wrote:
On Aug 21, 2017, at 4:39 AM, Gilles
wrote:
On Mon, 21 Aug 2017 08:31:55 +0200, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
Am 20.08.2017 um 23:11 schrieb Ralph Goers
:
I have to agree with Jochen and am -1 to this proposal. I have
stated before that I don’
Hi All,
We have a request for [CSV] to provide mutable records. There is no clear
consensus to me on how to do this. The current CSVRecord class is immutable
but is not documented as such. I attribute that to YAGNI up to now.
Options range from simply making CSVRecord immutable to creating a new
> On Aug 21, 2017, at 3:41 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> What about this for a compromise: create Commons Math 5 as a multi-module
> project and bring in as submodules only the newly minted components and
> whatever gets spun out of Math 3/4.
This feels like a good compromise to me. I'm actually
What about this for a compromise: create Commons Math 5 as a multi-module
project and bring in as submodules only the newly minted components and
whatever gets spun out of Math 3/4.
Gary
On Aug 21, 2017 13:26, "Dave Brosius" wrote:
> >> I get that what you are really trying to do is kill Common
>> I get that what you are really trying to do is kill Commons Math off
piece by piece. I just don’t agree with doing that.
This is ridiculous. Giles is the primary person trying to keep some
semblance of commons-math-like-stuff alive. He has asserted that there
is no way he can maintain all
> On Aug 21, 2017, at 4:39 AM, Gilles wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Aug 2017 08:31:55 +0200, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
>>> Am 20.08.2017 um 23:11 schrieb Ralph Goers :
>>>
>>> I have to agree with Jochen and am -1 to this proposal. I have stated
>>> before that I don’t want to see Commons become the plac
oops. My bad. I just noticed this is NOT a vote there. I just saw what looked
like votes.
Ralph
> On Aug 20, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> This is a vote thread - not a discussion thread. If you want to discuss
> people’s votes please move it to another thread.
>
> Ralph
>
>> On
On Mon, 21 Aug 2017 08:31:55 +0200, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
Am 20.08.2017 um 23:11 schrieb Ralph Goers
:
I have to agree with Jochen and am -1 to this proposal. I have
stated before that I don’t want to see Commons become the placeholder
for all the Math related components. If Math has stuff t
11 matches
Mail list logo
