Marek, Kellen, Jun, Da, Eric, myself and a few other people discussed offline about TensorRT integration PR ( https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11325 ). We do agree that it would be good to include the PR into upcoming 1.3 release, but are all concerned about the risk involved and the breaking API change. The discussion converged to following proposal. (1) change to contrib PR and (2) define a different top level API to indicate that the package is part of contrib and experimental (details of API TBD between Marek, Kellen and Eric). This change would allow to include TRT integration with v1.3 to enable users to try TRT with MXNet, minimize the risk and avoid breaking API change. To accommodate the change the request is to delay RC for a few days.
Regards, Steffen On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 5:08 PM Roshani Nagmote <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I have created a wiki for tracking MXNet 1.3 release with the timeline. > Please take a look here: > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.3.0+Release+Status > > I am still waiting for following 2 PRs to get merged: > TRT integration: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11325 > Gluon RNN: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11482 > > *Code freeze date is 08/02(Thursday).* Kindly try to complete ongoing work > and get these PRs merged. > > Thanks, > Roshani > > > > On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 1:02 PM Roshani Nagmote <[email protected] > > > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Here is an update on MXNet 1.3 release: > > I am still waiting for following PRs to get merged: > > > > TRT integration: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11325 > > Gluon RNN: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11482 > > Scala examples: > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11753 > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11621 > > > > *New code freeze date is: 08/03* Please try to get your ongoing PRs > > merged by then. > > > > @Pedro, I didn't include your PRs in tracking list as you said those are > > not critical for now. Please let me know if those needs to be included. > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11636 > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11562 > > > > I also have updated project proposal cwiki page to update the status of > > PRs. > > < > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Project+Proposals+for+next+MXNet+Release > > > > > > Please let me know if I am missing something. > > > > Thanks, > > Roshani > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 1:34 PM Pedro Larroy < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> I would like to get these PR merged: > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11636 > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11562 > >> > >> How much longer until the code freeze? > >> > >> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 1:44 AM Roshani Nagmote < > >> [email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Hi all, > >> > > >> > PRs waiting to be merged for 1.3 release: > >> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11325 > >> > > >> > Are there any other PRs waiting to get merged? Please let me know. > >> > > >> > Release blocker issue: > >> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/11853 > >> > > >> > @Marco, @Kellen, Thanks for bringing up the important topic. I agree > >> with > >> > you and we(internal Amazon team) will be working on fixing the > disabled > >> > tests. > >> > Currently, my colleague, Hao Jin is working on compiling the list of > >> > disabled tests and leading the effort to fix them in the next few > days. > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > Roshani > >> > > >> > On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 6:39 PM kellen sunderland < > >> > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> > > Thanks again for organizing Roshani. I believe the TensorRT work is > >> > ready > >> > > for a merge. Thanks to Marek and all the NVIDIA people for > iterating > >> on > >> > > it. If possible could a committer review, make sure it meets their > >> > > expectations and then merge? PR is here: > >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11325 > >> > > > >> > > To Marco's point. I'd recommend we review some of those disabled > >> tests > >> > and > >> > > see how likely they are to affect users before we cut a release. > >> Many of > >> > > them are obviously not too important from a user's point of view > (e.g. > >> > > downloading a sometimes-offline image in a test). One idea would be > >> to > >> > try > >> > > and address as many of the customer impacting issues as possible > >> between > >> > > code freeze and the RC0 vote. > >> > > > >> > > On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 1:23 PM Marco de Abreu > >> > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Hello Roshani, > >> > > > > >> > > > frequent releases are good and I'm supportive for this in general > in > >> > > order > >> > > > to provide our users with the latest features and improvements. > But > >> at > >> > > the > >> > > > moment, I'm slightly concerned about the test coverage due to > [1]. I > >> > want > >> > > > us to be conscious about cutting a release even though not all > tests > >> > are > >> > > > enabled (29 disabled tests [2] as of today). However, I > acknowledge > >> > that > >> > > we > >> > > > have improved by a lot lately thanks to everybody participating > and > >> > > leading > >> > > > the efforts around improving flaky tests. From a retrospective > >> point of > >> > > > view, we could say that these efforts have actually revealed some > >> quite > >> > > > interesting bugs and thus the time was well spent and yielded good > >> > > results. > >> > > > > >> > > > What does the community think about making another sprint of > >> > improvements > >> > > > around tests followed up by a period of 1-2 weeks during which we > >> > observe > >> > > > the failures closely to ensure that no critical paths are > impacted? > >> If > >> > we > >> > > > are in a good shape by then, we could continue the release process > >> and > >> > at > >> > > > the same time have the advantage of giving contributors more lead > >> time > >> > to > >> > > > finish their work to ensure it gets into the release in the > desired > >> > > > quality. > >> > > > > >> > > > Again, thanks to everybody for their efforts during the last weeks > >> to > >> > > > improve the usability and stability of MXNet. This is great > >> community > >> > > > effort and a good example of a community working together towards > a > >> > > unified > >> > > > goal! > >> > > > > >> > > > Best regards, > >> > > > Marco > >> > > > > >> > > > [1]: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/d6d81401de796a96677a112d6cd0b074b01f46564194ea89b86c6a3e@%3Cdev.mxnet.apache.org%3E > >> > > > [2]: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22Disabled+test%22 > >> > > > > >> > > > On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 8:34 PM Roshani Nagmote < > >> > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > Hi all, > >> > > > > > >> > > > > As mentioned before, code freeze date is today July 23rd. Please > >> try > >> > to > >> > > > get > >> > > > > your ongoing PRs merged by today. > >> > > > > Please let me know if there are any concerns or need more time. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks, > >> > > > > Roshani > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 1:16 PM Anirudh Acharya < > >> > [email protected] > >> > > > > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > @sandeep krishnamurthy <[email protected]> the bug > >> fixes > >> > > in > >> > > > > the > >> > > > > > R-package is something we have just begun, there will not be > >> > anything > >> > > > > > significant to announce before the v1.3 code freeze. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:08 PM Steffen Rochel < > >> > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > To make it easier to find the discussions related to project > >> > > > proposals > >> > > > > I > >> > > > > > > added a column with a link to the thread on dev@ for most > >> > > projects. > >> > > > > > > Appreciate for the project owners to fill in the blanks and > to > >> > > check > >> > > > > > that I > >> > > > > > > got the right threads. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Regards, > >> > > > > > > Steffen > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 7:11 PM Roshani Nagmote < > >> > > > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Hi Kellen, > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Sure. I will update the notes with the information. > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks, > >> > > > > > > > Roshani > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 3:01 PM kellen sunderland < > >> > > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Hey Roshani, > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Would you be able to add 'TensorRT Runtime Integration' > to > >> > the > >> > > > list > >> > > > > > of > >> > > > > > > > > upcoming features? We'll target getting the release in > >> and > >> > > > > polished > >> > > > > > by > >> > > > > > > > the > >> > > > > > > > > 23rd. Design proposal is here: > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Runtime+Integration+with+TensorRT > >> > > > > > > > > and the lead contributor is Marek Kolodziej. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > -Kellen > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 8:32 PM Roshani Nagmote < > >> > > > > > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > I am starting the process to prepare for Apache MXNet > >> > > > > (incubating) > >> > > > > > > 1.3 > >> > > > > > > > > > Release. Please find project proposal draft for this > >> > release > >> > > > > here: > >> > > > > > > > > > <* > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Project+Proposals+for+next+MXNet+Release > >> > > > > > > > > > < > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Project+Proposals+for+next+MXNet+Release > >> > > > > > > > > > >* > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Target feature freeze date is July 23rd. A release > >> > candidate > >> > > > will > >> > > > > > be > >> > > > > > > > cut > >> > > > > > > > > > around Monday, August 6th and voting will commence > from > >> > then > >> > > > > until > >> > > > > > > > > > Thursday, August 9th. If you have any additional > >> features > >> > in > >> > > > > > progress > >> > > > > > > > and > >> > > > > > > > > > would like to include it in this release, please make > >> sure > >> > to > >> > > > > > comment > >> > > > > > > > so > >> > > > > > > > > I > >> > > > > > > > > > can update the release notes. > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Feel free to add any other comments/suggestions. > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > >> > > > > > > > > > Roshani > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >
