Mik's review - first script

For now only the first script. Second one will follow shortly.

I'm not sure if a merge request is the best method for a review. Resolving merge conflicts of notebooks is very tedious and I think it would be more efficient to sit together to discuss changes before you spent time to implement those..... !?

added 7 commits

• 69bf34a6...8ab9e688 - 6 commits from branch master
• 8662ea81 - merge w/ master + 2nd round of review of 01 intro script

Compare with previous version

It was broken (forgot to actually merge master into branch). I've fixed it (yes, was tedious, but thanks to that also made a second round through). Hence, MR should be fine and, anyway, please wait until I process the second one.

added 1 commit

• 68459ee8 - rm temp file

Compare with previous version

why ? I thought we came to the conclusion that we explain metrics before overfitting ???

I didn't touch that. That was done by you after the meet (in ce6f0a47), which indicates an opposite conclusion. (It also agrees better with my vague memory of the discussion on that subject - no certainty however.)

Edit: also I have no idea why it pops up here in the merge request, but please do also double check first.

I would prefer that you make notes wich we can discuss before you edit the notebooks. Ok ?

Makes perfect sense for larger structural changes, but for mid/minor changes like here the notes => discuss => change cycle would be IMVHO quite counter-productive (would either cause over-discussing details or trigger "why change" reaction at the end). As agreed on Skype, let's just try discuss these changes and adjust the merge instead. I guess we could also make more abundant inline annotations/comments meanwhile to be removed at the end (smth like TODO danger boxes in this version).

merged

unmarked as a Work In Progress

changed title from WIP: Mik's review to Mik's review - first script