OK, let me clarify this. NNVM now contains two part of the library, to facilitate the migration.
- NNVM core library, which does not depend on tvm, and is what MXNet using now. - NNVM compiler, which depends on core library and tvm. So to build MXNet binary, you can simply use the current source tree, without worrying whether TVM submodule is in source or not. You do not have to ship binaries that are in TVM. I do not recall any discussion in terms of licensing problem of TVM. as far as I know it is Apache and follows the same license structure as nnvm did, so if you want to ship tvm source, please let me know what the problem is and we can work to fix that Tianqi On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 4:44 PM Gautam <gautamn...@gmail.com> wrote: > MXNet-1.0 depends on nnvm @ 8d79cfd > <https://github.com/dmlc/nnvm/tree/8d79cfd0b42fbe9f6ad75886d49506 > 5d5500b9dd> > which has TVM related commits. > > So one of the solution could be to go back in nnvm which doesn't include > TVM. > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Tianqi Chen <tqc...@cs.washington.edu> > wrote: > > > I mean Mxnet is not using tvm as a direct dependency. The support is > being > > done in nnvm compiler, which is not part of the release > > > > Tianqi > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 4:39 PM Tianqi Chen <tqc...@cs.washington.edu> > > wrote: > > > > > As far as i know Mxnet is not using tvm for now. So you can simply not > > > ship that jar > > > > > > Tianqi > > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 4:38 PM Chris Olivier <cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> tvm has a jar in it that (along with other things) is blocking 1,0 > > >> release. > > >> Can someone on tvm team please address this? > > >> > > >> Also, is mxnet 1.0 using tvm now? I don't recall this being discussed > > at > > >> all on dev@. If not, why is it in there? There's no licensing > > references > > >> as well, which is problematic. Is it necessary for 1.0? > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > Best Regards, > Gautam Kumar >
