James Verbus

Hi @eisber, Thanks for submitting this pull request! I'd like to avoid making these public to avoid any future complications if we choose to add new functionality (e.g. extended isolation...

The depth of each tree is already accessible: `isolationForestModel.isolationTrees(0).node.subtreeDepth` We can similarly add another calculation for the number of nodes in a subtree here: https://github.com/linkedin/isolation-forest/blob/master/isolation-forest/src/main/scala/com/linkedin/relevance/isolationforest/Nodes.scala#L12

@eisber: Thanks for creating this PR! We had a similar discussion internally (DataPoint case class vs. Array[Array[Float]]) back when I was creating the library. We decided on the DataPoint case...

You mentioned that it was working until several weeks ago. Has anything changed on your side (e.g., Spark / Scala versions used on your cluster)? There are several json issues...

@mockitoguy, thanks for the update!

@mockitoguy, @koral-- : Checking in to see if there are any updates on this feature request.

Thanks for the update, @mockitoguy!

Hey, @mockitoguy! I was recently thinking about this some more. Here is a bit more detail on my current process and an idea for a solution. **Current process** I'm now...

Thanks, @mstachniuk! It seems like that solution would require creating a separate sub-module in the project for each additional artifact variant? I could imagine having builds for multiple different combinations...

Thanks for creating the new ticket! Will this require a cross-build setup so that all variants are built simultaneously, or will it be possible to have multiple separate build jobs...