You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I emailed the repo owner not too long ago and he seems to be relatively busy, though interested in people still submitting patches. He also mentioned that the library goes through a very particular test system before any revision, which is why it wasn't so easy for him to be able to keep up with it.
Anyways, that's about all I have in terms of this. I would be interested in working on the convex solver for a similar library, if anyone is willing to either fork this project for a full active branch, or start a new project.
Yeah, it really concerns me that basic issues such as #66 have not be resolved. He may be interested in people submitting patches, but he has not accepted any it seems.
Yeah, it really concerns me that basic issues such as #66 #66 have not be resolved. He may
be interested in people submitting patches, but he has not accepted any it
seems.
If anyone is still up for forking the project and continuing a main development branch, I'd still be interested in some work on the general optimization solvers and such.
Okay, I've waited two weeks and haven't received a response. It might just be easiest if we get an official fork going. Anyone else in seeing an updated v2 version of this repo?
Yeah, I don't think there's an updated version with any major revisions, to be honest, just a bunch of pull requests/small patches. So, go ahead and fork it, I think we'd all be on board with it and just start contributing.
I think the project should be maintained and improved in some way. I am also intereseted in and can help as much i can. The framework(a numeric enviroment) i work on highly depend on numeric.js
I was waiting for the repo owner to respond by the end of the week, but I suppose this could work too. Shouldn't we do a "hard" fork instead of a soft fork though? I know my behavior is just click through to the original repo on soft-fork. Also maybe we should list it under a Github organization for organization's sake in case this ever happens again?
The main problem that I have is that, whenever I make a change, I must run the entire test suite in a variety of browsers. I've set it up on my mac to run in Chrome, Firefox, as well as on IE in a Windows Parallels machine; to me this seemed like the minimal coverage necessary. I have found that testing on all browsers is very important because there's often something that will fail in only one of them.
To do this, I use Selenium, and this is where it gets hairy. Every time I want to release, I invariably have to update Selenium and all plugins, across two operating systems, and also often I have to upgrade my scripts that do the communication between mac and Windows for this testing.
Fancy people with money have "continuous deployment" or whatever, a farm of servers that automatically test in a variety of browsers, but I don't have this and I don't want to sysadmin it either!
Yes, you can configure Sauce labs for automatic GitHub integrated CI testing on real browsers. Each pull request could then be automatically checked against a test suite. So you would not have to run anything locally. It is free for open source projects.
@mitar Want to help setup the integrated CI testing on the peopledoware fork? I want to get the automated testing setup on at least one fork so we can get the benchmarking setup on at least one fork.
Anyone forking numericjs should work from Daniel Holden's fork ( @orangeduck ), which added NumPy-style broadcasting and other useful stuff. He did good work. He even updated the documentation page.
Now we test on multiple node version using Travis CI, and on Firefox and Chrome using Circle CI, and IE using Circle CI + Sauce Labs. See example: https://circleci.com/gh/mitar/numeric/17
@sloisel may I advise that you set up a Patreon project for this? I'm sure the people here who make money from this project will be happy to contribute.
Activity
victorsosa commentedon Feb 26, 2016
it seems like
angeris commentedon Feb 29, 2016
I emailed the repo owner not too long ago and he seems to be relatively busy, though interested in people still submitting patches. He also mentioned that the library goes through a very particular test system before any revision, which is why it wasn't so easy for him to be able to keep up with it.
Anyways, that's about all I have in terms of this. I would be interested in working on the convex solver for a similar library, if anyone is willing to either fork this project for a full active branch, or start a new project.
Skylion007 commentedon Jun 9, 2016
Yeah, it really concerns me that basic issues such as #66 have not be resolved. He may be interested in people submitting patches, but he has not accepted any it seems.
reptillicus commentedon Jun 9, 2016
I don't believe that it is. Someone who has time should fork it and take
over maintanence.
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 11:17 AM, Aaron Gokaslan notifications@github.com
wrote:
Skylion007 commentedon Jun 9, 2016
Yeah I just emailed the repo owner to ask if he'd be willing to add a collaborator to the repository to help with merging commits.
reptillicus commentedon Jun 9, 2016
I'd be willing to help out with maintanence to some degree. I'm somewhat
busy for the next few months but could chip in.
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Aaron Gokaslan notifications@github.com
wrote:
angeris commentedon Jun 14, 2016
If anyone is still up for forking the project and continuing a main development branch, I'd still be interested in some work on the general optimization solvers and such.
Skylion007 commentedon Jun 23, 2016
Okay, I've waited two weeks and haven't received a response. It might just be easiest if we get an official fork going. Anyone else in seeing an updated v2 version of this repo?
angeris commentedon Jun 23, 2016
Yeah, I don't think there's an updated version with any major revisions, to be honest, just a bunch of pull requests/small patches. So, go ahead and fork it, I think we'd all be on board with it and just start contributing.
beehorf commentedon Jun 24, 2016
I think the project should be maintained and improved in some way. I am also intereseted in and can help as much i can. The framework(a numeric enviroment) i work on highly depend on numeric.js
angeris commentedon Jun 29, 2016
Okay, so, could somebody who is willing to be active on the project just branch it such that we can all contribute?
victorsosa commentedon Jun 29, 2016
I can do that 👍
https://github.com/peoplewareDo/numeric
Send you patches and let works on it
Skylion007 commentedon Jun 29, 2016
I was waiting for the repo owner to respond by the end of the week, but I suppose this could work too. Shouldn't we do a "hard" fork instead of a soft fork though? I know my behavior is just click through to the original repo on soft-fork. Also maybe we should list it under a Github organization for organization's sake in case this ever happens again?
Skylion007 commentedon Jun 29, 2016
Also, we probably want to rebrand it to note that behavior might significantly diverge from the original such as numeric2.js.
victorsosa commentedon Jun 29, 2016
I put it under an Organization so, just send the patch with the rebrand to the new repo. Let's work.
1 remaining item
angeris commentedon Jun 29, 2016
Yeah, that sounds good... I think the author wouldn't mind too much and worst comes to worst, we could just consolidate with the author at the end.
P.S. It would be great if I could also be added to the Organization.
sloisel commentedon Jun 30, 2016
Hi,
Of course you guys can fork if you want!
The main problem that I have is that, whenever I make a change, I must run the entire test suite in a variety of browsers. I've set it up on my mac to run in Chrome, Firefox, as well as on IE in a Windows Parallels machine; to me this seemed like the minimal coverage necessary. I have found that testing on all browsers is very important because there's often something that will fail in only one of them.
To do this, I use Selenium, and this is where it gets hairy. Every time I want to release, I invariably have to update Selenium and all plugins, across two operating systems, and also often I have to upgrade my scripts that do the communication between mac and Windows for this testing.
I only release when all the tests are green. It should look like this:
http://www.numericjs.com/report.html
Fancy people with money have "continuous deployment" or whatever, a farm of servers that automatically test in a variety of browsers, but I don't have this and I don't want to sysadmin it either!
reptillicus commentedon Jul 4, 2016
Sauce labs if free for open source projects, could look into that.
https://saucelabs.com/opensauce/
moleike commentedon Jul 4, 2016
@sloisel if that is the problem, you could also check https://ci.testling.com/
timqian commentedon Jul 27, 2016
I am doing a refactoring of this project recently. ( https://github.com/timqian/mathlab )
The aims includes:
Please let me know your thoughts about it.
mitar commentedon Jul 31, 2016
Yes, you can configure Sauce labs for automatic GitHub integrated CI testing on real browsers. Each pull request could then be automatically checked against a test suite. So you would not have to run anything locally. It is free for open source projects.
angeris commentedon Aug 1, 2016
@timqian Once you get the CI testing/refactoring done and such, I'd be happy to contribute to debugging some of the optimization methods.
Skylion007 commentedon Aug 6, 2016
@mitar Want to help setup the integrated CI testing on the peopledoware fork? I want to get the automated testing setup on at least one fork so we can get the benchmarking setup on at least one fork.
yig commentedon Oct 5, 2016
Anyone forking numericjs should work from Daniel Holden's fork ( @orangeduck ), which added NumPy-style broadcasting and other useful stuff. He did good work. He even updated the documentation page.
Here is his repository:
https://github.com/orangeduck/numeric
Here is his pull request:
#56
Here is his announcement on the Google Group:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/numericjs/giRexhL3ydg
mitar commentedon Dec 2, 2016
I made #76 with Travis CI tests.
mitar commentedon Dec 2, 2016
You can see example run here: https://travis-ci.org/mitar/numeric/builds/180668112
mitar commentedon Dec 2, 2016
@sloisel: Do you care giving commit bits to few people here? I think there are quite few who would be willing to help maintain it.
mitar commentedon Dec 4, 2016
Now we test on multiple node version using Travis CI, and on Firefox and Chrome using Circle CI, and IE using Circle CI + Sauce Labs. See example: https://circleci.com/gh/mitar/numeric/17
quantuminformation commentedon Oct 18, 2017
@sloisel may I advise that you set up a Patreon project for this? I'm sure the people here who make money from this project will be happy to contribute.
mitar commentedon Oct 18, 2017
I would just advice to open maintenanceship. This project is not being maintained for 5 years now.