Hi Sheng, 1. I've been following the discussion on the branching & versioning thread. Features like MKLDNN integration should not go to patch release 1.0.1, and it's risky to merge large PRs right before the release. I've removed the MKLDNN section from the release note. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.0.1+Release+Notes
2. I agree that we should aim for better test coverage & stable CI, and get those disabled/flaky tests fixed eventually. Fixing these requires efforts from the community and I strongly encourage contributors to help. Removing the corresponding feature from the release doesn't sound practical since users might be already using some of those. I suggest that we keep track of these tests on Apache Wiki and make sure they are addressed for the release after 1.0.1. Hi everyone, In terms of the current status for this release, all critical bug fixes are merged (to the best of my knowledge) and we have made good progress fixing license issues. As Meghna mentioned, a list of open questions regarding license is at https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Source+Licenses section D - it would be great if we can get more clarification/help/feedback from Apache mentors. I suggest that we shoot for code freeze for 1.0.1 rc0 this Wednesday. Does anyone have concern or objection on this? Best, Haibin On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 7:51 AM, Steffen Rochel <steffenroc...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Sheng - > 1. branch usage and versioning - lets converge our discussion and document > the agreement on wiki. I started a draft summarizing my understanding of > the proposal at > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Release+Versioning+and+ > Branching. > Lets work together to refine and clarify the draft, so we have clarity > going forward. I'm inviting everyone to contribute to this discussion. > As MKLDNN integration is not ready yet and we want to release all the good > improvements including updates in tutorials and documentation I suggest we > move forward with the release asap. As we don't have major features or > non-compatible API changes (to best of my knowledge) I think it is > appropriate to label the release as 1.0.1. > Note: This label indicates a patch release. Patch releases should be > created from the related release branch. As we didn't plan for it and to > minimize overhead I suggest we make a one time exception to cut the 1.0.1 > release from master branch and clearly communicate in release notes. Going > forward we should follow the methodology for versioning and branching to > whatever we agree on. > 2. Disabled tests: I agree with your concerns that we had to disable 13 > tests due to non-deterministic behavior (see issues > <https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/labels/Flaky>). I'm calling on > all contributors to help to resolve the non-deterministic behavior, so we > can improve our test coverage. As we discussed offline, lets tests manually > short term, document the known issue in the release notes and prioritize > efforts post 1.0.1 release. > > Regards, > Steffen > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:05 PM Sheng Zha <zhash...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Hi Haibin, > > > > Thanks for leading this. I suggest that we hold onto this release until > we > > have clarity on the following items. > > > > 1. branch usage and versioning > > Given that we are past 1.0 and we're changing APIs, I'd like to suggest > > that we first agree on how > > versioning works in mxnet. If we follow semantic versioning, it would > > suggest that features like > > MKL-DNN should go at least into 1.1 (minor version change) instead of > > 1.0.1 (patch release). > > Also, assuming that new release will come from a new forked branch, I > > suggest that we clarify on how to > > name the branches too. > > You can find relevant thread at > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c52f8353f63c1e63b2646ec3b08d9a > 8180a1381787d777b41b8ac69f@%3Cdev.mxnet.apache.org%3E > > > > 2. disabled tests > > For the purpose of stabilizing test automation system, many tests were > > disabled. In order to avoid > > releasing untested features, we should mitigate the situation of having > > disabled tests. > > That means we can fix the tests before the release, or remove the > > corresponding feature from release > > (might be hard to do, e.g. for optimizer). Otherwise, we must > collectively > > decide that a feature is > > OK to release without tests. > > The thread on this topic can be found at > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/addab1937bfcf09b5dfa15c1149ddc > ebd084f1c4bf4e10a73770fb35@%3Cdev.mxnet.apache.org%3E > > > > We can proceed on the release with more confidence once we have clarity. > > > > Best regards, > > -sz > > > > On 2018-01-10 15:33, Haibin Lin <haibin.lin....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I am starting the process to prepare for MXNET 1.0.1 release. I have > > > drafted release notes > > > (* > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/ > Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.0.1+Release+Notes > > > < > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/ > Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.0.1+Release+Notes > > >*) > > > to cover the tasks under this release. > > > > > > A release candidate will be cut on Monday 22nd Jan, 2018 and voting > will > > > commence from then till Thursday 25th Jan, 2018. If you have any > > additional > > > features in progress and would like to include it in this release, > please > > > assure they have been merged by Thursday 18th Jan, 2018 with comment > so I > > > may update the release notes. > > > > > > Feel free to add any other comments/suggestions. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Haibin > > > > > >
