Rename MLFlowLogger ?

[ablaom]

I think having MLJFlow, MLFlowLogger, etc, - sometimes there is a "j" and sometimes not - is bit of cognitive burden. What if we rename MLFlowLogger to Logger? So, in MLJ the user does

logger = Logger(...)

In the rare case there are multiple logging platforms at play, the user can resolve the ambiguity with MLJFlow.Logger. Or we could just not export the name and have the user do logger = MLJFlow.Logger(...). Ie., the user does

logger = MLJFlow.Logger()

Of course this is a breaking change but I think that's fine at this early stage of development.

@pebeto What do you think?

[pebeto]

@ablaom The changes are now on dev. You can review them here fbd8639.

How the user will use Logger constructor without the explicit export? Considering that this doesn't work in the way of MLJ.Logger.

[ablaom]

Okay, then I take it you agree to the suggestion.

How the user will use Logger constructor without the explicit export? Considering that this doesn't work in the way of MLJ.Logger.

The user will do logger = MLJFlow.Logger(). This means we need MLJ to export the name MLJFlow, which I see does not currently happen.

[ablaom]

This means we need MLJ to export the name MLJFlow, which I see does not currently happen.

Not sure what made me say that? In latest MLJ MLJFlow it appears to be exported:

julia> using MLJ
[ Info: Precompiling MLJ [add582a8-e3ab-11e8-2d5e-e98b27df1bc7]

julia> MLJFlow
MLJFlow

(jl_dz4xQ2) pkg> st
Status `/private/var/folders/4n/gvbmlhdc8xj973001s6vdyw00000gq/T/jl_dz4xQ2/Project.toml`
  [add582a8] MLJ v0.20.1