search

scikit-learn / enhancement_proposals

Enhancement proposals for scikit-learn: structured discussions and rational for large additions and modifications
https://scikit-learn-enhancement-proposals.readthedocs.io/en/latest
BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License
48 stars 34 forks source link

VOTE propose vote for SLEP007 #59

Closed glemaitre closed 2 years ago

glemaitre commented 3 years ago

In this PR, I propose a vote for SLEP007.

As per our governance, the vote will last 1 month and will be announced shortly on the internal mailing list. We will seek a consensus during this month. If no consensus is found, the decision will be escalated to the Technical Committee (TC).

agramfort commented 3 years ago

+1 That will be a great addition to sklearn !

glemaitre commented 3 years ago

+1 as well

TomDLT commented 3 years ago

+1

adrinjalali commented 3 years ago

+1

lorentzenchr commented 3 years ago

+1

jjerphan commented 3 years ago

Just to clarify: my approval for this PR stands for a +1 for the vote.

thomasjpfan commented 3 years ago

+1 with minor adjustment to verbose_feature_names_out in ColumnTransformer: https://github.com/scikit-learn/enhancement_proposals/pull/60

jnothman commented 3 years ago

The SLEP says nothing of the types of the feature names (str vs other) or the collection of them (list vs array). Should it? Otherwise, I'm happy with this.

(I have wondered, however, whether we give ourselves headaches by trying to ascribe names, rather than objects with structure and behaviour, to the representation of features. But certainly, we'd be giving ourselves more headaches if we wanted to attach such structured objects to DataFrames!)

glemaitre commented 3 years ago

The SLEP says nothing of the types of the feature names (str vs other) or the collection of them (list vs array).

This is probably something that we should clarify by amending the current proposal as done there: https://github.com/scikit-learn/enhancement_proposals/pull/59#issuecomment-956441998

thomasjpfan commented 2 years ago

Opened #61 to add more details regarding the container, dtype, and strings.

glemaitre commented 2 years ago

The vote has been open for a month and a consensus has been reached. By our decision-making process, I changed the status of this SLEP to "Accepted".

We can provide post-history changes to give more details and improve the current proposal.

ping @adrinjalali @thomasjpfan did I miss anything in the process? I let you review and merge this PR if everything is OK.

adrinjalali commented 2 years ago

I agree, and I think we've gone forward with the implementation and we seem to have a good consensus now.