[scikit-learn] Sprint discussion points?
Guillaume Lemaître
g.lemaitre58 at gmail.com
Wed Feb 20 12:12:01 EST 2019
@Andy You were the one contacting Travis.
On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 17:23, Andreas Mueller <t3kcit at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for bringing that up.
> Did I email travis last time?
>
> We should also follow up with Microsoft as they promised unlimited
> builds...
>
>
> On 2/20/19 3:48 AM, Alexandre Gramfort wrote:
> > we should also see if we can have a lot of CI machines for the 5 days
> > as it's always the blocker to move fast during 1 week.
> >
> > my 2c
> > Alex
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 7:35 AM Roman Yurchak via scikit-learn
> > <scikit-learn at python.org> wrote:
> >> Thanks for putting the draft schedule together!
> >>
> >> Personally I will be there 3 days out of 5 and wouldn't want to miss the
> >> discussion on euclidean distance issues. Maybe we could adjust the
> >> schedule during the sprint (say on Tuesday) based on people's interest
> >> and availability? That might be easier than trying to figure it out for
> >> 29 participants over email..
> >>
> >> Also IMO it would makes sense to have some discussions (that are not
> >> that controversial or about high level API but still useful) earlier
> >> during the week to be able to work on them during the sprint.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Roman
> >>
> >> On 20/02/2019 02:30, Joel Nothman wrote:
> >>> I don't think I'll be able to stay for the Friday 10am discussion, but
> >>> have a PR open on "efficient grid search" so should probably be
> involved.
> >>>
> >>> Perhaps the fit_transform discussion can happen without you, Andy?
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 10:17, Andreas Mueller <t3kcit at gmail.com
> >>> <mailto:t3kcit at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I put a draft schedule here:
> >>>
> https://github.com/scikit-learn/scikit-learn/wiki/Upcoming-events#technical-discussions-schedule
> >>>
> >>> it's obviously somewhat opinionated ;)
> >>> Happy to reprioritize.
> >>> Basically I wouldn't like to miss any of the big API discussions
> >>> because coming late to the party.
> >>>
> >>> The two things on (grid?) searches are somewhat related: one is
> >>> about specifying search-spaces, the other about executing a given
> >>> search space efficiently. They probably warrant separate
> discussions.
> >>>
> >>> I haven't added plotting or sample props on it, which are maybe
> two
> >>> other discussion points.
> >>> I tried to cover most controversial things from the roadmap.
> >>>
> >>> Not sure if discussing the schedule via the mailing list is the
> best
> >>> way? Don't want to create even more traffic than I already am ;)
> >>>
> >>> On 2/19/19 5:48 PM, Guillaume Lemaître wrote:
> >>>> > Not sure if Guillaume had ideas about the schedule, given that
> >>>> he seems to be running the show?
> >>>>
> >>>> Mostly running behind the show ...
> >>>>
> >>>> For the moment, we only have a 30 minutes presentation of
> >>>> introduction planned on Monday.
> >>>> For the rest of the week, this is pretty much opened and I think
> >>>> that we can propose a schedule such that we can be efficient.
> >>>> IMO, two meetings of an hour per day look good to me.
> >>>>
> >>>> Shall we prioritize the list of the issues? Maybe that some
> issues
> >>>> could be packed together.
> >>>> I would not be against having a rough schedule on the wiki
> >>>> directly and I think that having it before Monday could be
> better.
> >>>>
> >>>> Let me know how I can help.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 22:23, Andreas Mueller <t3kcit at gmail.com
> >>>> <mailto:t3kcit at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Yeah, sounds good.
> >>>> I didn't want to unilaterally post a schedule, but doing some
> >>>> google form or similar seems a bit heavy-handed?
> >>>> Not sure if Guillaume had ideas about the schedule, given
> that
> >>>> he seems to be running the show?
> >>>>
> >>>> On 2/19/19 4:17 PM, Joel Nothman wrote:
> >>>>> I don't think optics requires a large meeting, just a few
> >>>>> people.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm happy with your proposal generally, Andy. Do we schedule
> >>>>> specific topics at this point?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> scikit-learn mailing list
> >>>>> scikit-learn at python.org <mailto:scikit-learn at python.org>
> >>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> scikit-learn mailing list
> >>>> scikit-learn at python.org <mailto:scikit-learn at python.org>
> >>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Guillaume Lemaitre
> >>>> INRIA Saclay - Parietal team
> >>>> Center for Data Science Paris-Saclay
> >>>> https://glemaitre.github.io/
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> scikit-learn mailing list
> >>>> scikit-learn at python.org <mailto:scikit-learn at python.org>
> >>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> scikit-learn mailing list
> >>> scikit-learn at python.org <mailto:scikit-learn at python.org>
> >>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> scikit-learn mailing list
> >> scikit-learn at python.org
> >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
> > _______________________________________________
> > scikit-learn mailing list
> > scikit-learn at python.org
> > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
>
> _______________________________________________
> scikit-learn mailing list
> scikit-learn at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-learn
>
--
Guillaume Lemaitre
INRIA Saclay - Parietal team
Center for Data Science Paris-Saclay
https://glemaitre.github.io/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/scikit-learn/attachments/20190220/a1c64858/attachment.html>
More information about the scikit-learn
mailing list