[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: kernel density smoother?
From: |
forkandwait |
Subject: |
Re: kernel density smoother? |
Date: |
Sat, 13 Mar 2010 16:10:34 +0000 (UTC) |
User-agent: |
Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) |
> a good indication that people shouldn't
> declare me the Octave-Forge leader). Concrete ideas on how to improve
> the situation are, however, most welcome as it is a problem that
> concerns me.
I guess I may have been a little "flip" in my comments. I am not sure strong
leadership is necessarily the answer, though it might help. What is great
about Python is that there is a SINGLE, documented, well defined standard
library. This library grows steadily, but there is a discussion process before
something makes it into the library, there are votes on where it goes, and then
it is documented/ enforced / distributed at the same level as the language
itself. And whenever there is no clear consensus or the process gets bogged
down, Guido reserves the right to declare by fiat what should happen.
In this particular example, I would NOT have voted to have the kernel density
smoother function in the econometrics package, but rather in either statistics
or core. And I would have statistics ALWAYS distributed with the main package.
But I definitely think it belongs with a standard distribution of octave, and
its code should be tracked in the main source. Same with textread. Same
probably with csv2cell, after a process of deciding to put it into the standard
library, even though the other large competitor doesn't have it in their
distribution (which might be a criteria for inclusion). Etc.
THere are several "levels" of library -- planet python (or whatever it is
called) is where random people put up their scripts. Then scripts that get
used regularly get adopted into the inner circle and tracked with the main
source.
I don't have a surplus of time or skill, but I have a LOT of free soft karma to
repay if I can help.
- kernel density smoother?, forkandwait, 2010/03/11
- Re: kernel density smoother?, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, 2010/03/12
- Re: kernel density smoother?, Søren Hauberg, 2010/03/12
- Re: kernel density smoother?, forkandwait, 2010/03/12
- Re: kernel density smoother?, Søren Hauberg, 2010/03/12
- Re: kernel density smoother?,
forkandwait <=
- Re: kernel density smoother?, Jaroslav Hajek, 2010/03/13
- Re: kernel density smoother?, Søren Hauberg, 2010/03/13
- Re: kernel density smoother?, Michael Creel, 2010/03/14
Re: kernel density smoother?, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso, 2010/03/12
Re: kernel density smoother?, Michael Creel, 2010/03/13
Re: kernel density smoother?, Michael Creel, 2010/03/13