Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Docs reorganization #29

Closed
mrocklin opened this issue Oct 12, 2017 · 3 comments · Fixed by #30
Closed

Docs reorganization #29

mrocklin opened this issue Oct 12, 2017 · 3 comments · Fixed by #30

Comments

@mrocklin
Copy link
Member

I've been walking through the documentation and had a few notes. I'd be happy to make these changes but wanted to check in before I submitted anything.

The separation between single machine and distributed learning seems odd to me. Many of the topics listed in single machine (grid search, pipelining, possibly even incremental learning) are still relevant when on a cluster.

I might instead flatten the TOC to just remove the single-machine/distributed distinction, and give all of the subsections their own home. This might flatten the TOC to something like the following:

  1. Pipelines
  2. Hyper-parameter search
  3. Incremental learning
  4. Generalized Linear Models
  5. Joblib
  6. XGBoost
  7. Clustering
  8. Examples
  9. API

I've also found it pleasant recently to start sections with the API relevant for that section. Futures docs for an example. This gives a quick list at the beginning of each section on the API relevant for that section. Those functions still link to the main API doc page.

Any thoughts or objections to this reorganization @TomAugspurger ?

@TomAugspurger
Copy link
Member

The separation between single machine and distributed learning seems odd to me.

Agreed. I'm not sure why I found that distinction so relevant a few months ago.

Your proposed TOC sounds reasonable. For now, I think Pipelines would make a good home for things in preprocessing/.

I've also found it pleasant recently to start sections with the API relevant for that section.

That could get a bit boring for scikit-learn style estimators, since it'll (almost) always be.fit, .transform, etc :) Perhaps I'm misunderstanding though.

@TomAugspurger
Copy link
Member

TomAugspurger commented Oct 12, 2017

And if you're busy, I'll have time to work on this later today or tomorrow, as I wait around for pandas release things to finish.

@mrocklin
Copy link
Member Author

That could get a bit boring for scikit-learn style estimators, since it'll (almost) always be.fit, .transform, etc :) Perhaps I'm misunderstanding though.

Yeah, to be clear I'm saying that we just add the .. autosummary: line at the top of each relevant section. When you go to the Generalized Linear Models section you see LinearRegression, LogisticRegression, PoissonRegression, _GLM at the top of the section. If you care to you can click on those to be taken to the full API docs on another page.

mrocklin added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 12, 2017
This breaks out sections based on algorithm type rather than on
single/distributed.

Fixes #29

This still needs substantial work, both in fixing up API docs and
fleshing out content in the various sections.
mrocklin added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 13, 2017
* Reorganize documentation

This breaks out sections based on algorithm type rather than on
single/distributed.

Fixes #29

This still needs substantial work, both in fixing up API docs and
fleshing out content in the various sections.

* Fixed references to other increment linear models

* Added toc directives

* Touch up

* update hyper-parameter text

* import from daskml, not dask_searchcv

* update glm docs

* update incremental docst

* replace with dask.distributed's joblib doc

* update xgboost docs

* add xgboost import file

* flake8

* Warning fixup

* Remove link from __init__

also add imported text in joblib
TomAugspurger pushed a commit to TomAugspurger/dask-ml that referenced this issue Oct 17, 2019
Add Regularizer classes; also closes issue dask#6
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants