Hi all, I added a section F in the document that explained the current static-linked dependencies we used for official release. As there are a few licenses are under BSD3 and GPL, we need to handle them in our next release. Please take a look and leave any concerns you may have.
Thanks, Qing On 1/7/19, 8:33 PM, "kellen sunderland" <[email protected]> wrote: So I see two quick options that should cut down on the dependency licenses required for TRT in the source release. 1: We can simply remove in the release package the submodules for onnx in folder incubator-mxnet/3rdparty/onnx-tensorrt/third_party/onnx/third_party. None of those dependencies are used in the build (I've just verified locally on my machine). 2: We can make a cmake based checkout system and ensure we only checkout the required files when TRT builds are enabled (similar to the current mkl-ml setup). I'd suggest option 1 for this release, and that we support option 2 for the 1.5 release. On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:19 PM Lv, Tao A <[email protected]> wrote: > What should I do for the double headers in 3rdparty/mkldnn/src/cpu/xbyak/? > > -tao > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 10:51 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status > > Kellen and Tao - > yes, the understanding is that dependencies need to be considered and all > licences referenced to include in top level LICENSE file. > Appreciate your help with it. > Steffen > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:39 PM kellen sunderland < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Sorry to hear about the licensing issues. I was following the general > > vote but I'm still lacking some clarity around what licenses in the > > onnx-trt repo need to be surfaced. I believe onnx-trt is MIT > > licensed, but it includes Onnx as a third party repo which then brings > > in dependencies with a variety of licenses. The proposal is that we > > look at these on an individual basis and then add them to our top level > LICENSE file right? > > > > An alternative is that we may be able to checkout a smaller source > > code dependency tree if we remove a few unneeded ONNX's dependencies > > (pybind and google-bench). My hope is that this wouldn't affect our > > compilation process and would get us down to two licenses to report > > (just Onnx and Onnx-TRT, both MIT). > > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:07 PM Meghna Baijal > > <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi All, > > > For some more context, these were the last emails I sent on the dev > > > and legal lists requesting help on the open questions – > > > > > > 1. Question on legal about the CC-By-2.5 < > > > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201805.mbox > > /%3CCAK1xzDe6ECToKt_2cTR_7txQQCwHeYfvxXDfmuGgfA3jaTs=j...@mail.gmail.com > > %3E > > > > > > > 2. Question on dev about googletest file < > > > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mxnet-dev/201804.mbox/%3CCAMG > > [email protected]%3E > > > > > > > 3. General Request for review of the licenses wiki < > > > > > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mxnet-dev/201801.mbox/%3CCAM > > [email protected]%3E > > > > > > > > > > (Note: You can click on the the “>>” next to the thread on the top > > > right to view the next responses in the email threads in the apache > > > archive. ) > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Meghna Baijal > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 4:30 PM Steffen Rochel > > > <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Dear MXNet community - > > > > as you should have seen in previous email, voting for v1.4.0.rc0 > > > > has > > been > > > > cancelled. We received a -1 vote due to outstanding license issues. > > > > Please help to update > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Source+License > > s > > > > and > > > > resolve outstanding issues. > > > > > > > > I would like to ask specifically for help from contributors to > > > > mkldnn, opemmp and onnx-tensorrt to address the feedback from > > > > Justin - see > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ebb8c4c00fb66dd98da13621c7dcb8753 > > fee57562a861d61379d31e9@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E > > > > . > > > > > > > > I suggest to fix the issues first on master, then cherry-pick and > > > > merge > > > to > > > > 1.4.x branch. > > > > > > > > I'm suggesting to exclude Julia from 1.4.0 release as integration > > > > into MXNet repo and upgrade to 0.7+ is WIP. > > > > I'm suggesting to exclude googletest/googlemock from 1.4.0 release > > > > as outstanind license issues are not resolved yet. This should not > > > > impact users. > > > > > > > > Please provide your feedback to the suggestions. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Steffen > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 1:34 PM Steffen Rochel < > > [email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dear MXNet community - > > > > > I hope you have seen that voting for v1.4.0.rc0 has started and > > > > > will continue until December 27th noon. So far two binding +1 > votes. > > > > > I suggesting the following schedule to account for holidays and > > > > > of > > > course > > > > > depending on voting feedback. > > > > > > > > > > Vote on dev@ until 12/27 > > > > > > > > > > Vote on general@ 12/28 – 1/3 > > > > > > > > > > Release announcement with pre-build language bindings 1/9 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please let me know if you have concerns with the proposed schedule. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > Steffen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 11:22 AM Haibin Lin < > > [email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Hi Steffen, > > > > >> > > > > >> Aston and I would like to bring this PR to your attention: > > > > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13686, where Zhi > > fixed > > > > the > > > > >> num_worker argument of DataLoader on windows. Without this fix, > > using > > > > >> DataLoader with num_worker > 0 would result in crash on Windows. > > > > Bringing > > > > >> this PR to 1.4.x would greatly benefit windows users of MXNet. > > > > >> Aston > > > is > > > > >> working on the dive into deep learning book > > > > >> <http://diveintodeeplearning.org> based on MXNet, which is due > > > > >> and > > > > frozen > > > > >> for publication next week. Currently the book will depend on > > > > >> MXNet > > > 1.4.0 > > > > >> and discourages readers from using multi-worker DataLoaders due > > > > >> to > > > this > > > > >> bug > > > > >> on Windows. With this fix Aston can update the examples in the > > > > >> book > > > with > > > > >> DataLoader using multiple workers, which will be very > > > > >> beneficial to > > > the > > > > >> broader MXNet community. > > > > >> > > > > >> Best, > > > > >> Haibin > > > > >> > > > > >> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 6:11 AM Pedro Larroy < > > > > >> [email protected]> > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > Hi Steffen > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Added some notes in your PR for the release notes. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > In particular, I'm a bit concerned about the status of > > > > >> > topology > > > aware > > > > >> > communication, since it has open issues and is not being > > > > >> > tested in > > > CI. > > > > >> > (The tests also fail). I think we should anounce it when it's > > > working > > > > >> > properly and it's well tested. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Pedro. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 11:06 AM Steffen Rochel < > > > > >> [email protected]> > > > > >> > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Dear MXNet community - > > > > >> > > all issues beside one > > > > >> > > <https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/13438> > > > > >> > > have > > > been > > > > >> > > addressed. I suggest to document the last remaining issue > > > > >> > > as > > known > > > > >> > problem > > > > >> > > and move forward with the release. > > > > >> > > Please communicate if you have concerns of know about > > > > >> > > critical > > > > issues > > > > >> to > > > > >> > be > > > > >> > > addressed before starting vote about releasing 1.4.0 as > > > > >> > > soon as > > > > >> possible. > > > > >> > > Please also have a look at the release notes < > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incu > > bating%29+1.4.0+Release+Notes > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > and provide feedback. > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > I'm planing to start voting beginning of next week. > > > > >> > > Steffen > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 8:31 PM Steffen Rochel < > > > > >> [email protected]> > > > > >> > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > Hi Pedro - this are indeed the draft release notes for > v1.4.0. > > > > >> Please > > > > >> > add > > > > >> > > > description as you suggested. > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > All - please have a look at the release notes and provide > > > feedback > > > > >> and > > > > >> > > > suggestions.. > > > > >> > > > Steffen > > > > >> > > > On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 3:30 AM Zhao, Patric < > > > > [email protected]> > > > > >> > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > >> Hi Steffen, > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> I saw the draft of 1.4 release notes in here ( > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incu > > bating%29+1.4.0+Release+Notes > > > > >> > > >> ). > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> Is this near the final version? I'd like to add some > > > > descriptions > > > > >> of > > > > >> > new > > > > >> > > >> quantization features enabled in 1.4. > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> Is it OK? > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> --Patric > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > > > >> > > >> > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:[email protected]] > > > > >> > > >> > Sent: Saturday, December 8, 2018 1:12 AM > > > > >> > > >> > To: [email protected] > > > > >> > > >> > Subject: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > Dear MXNet community - I would like to provide update > > > > >> > > >> > on v1.4.0 status, details > > are > > > > >> tracked > > > > >> > > >> here > > > > >> > > >> > < > > > > >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28i > > > > >> > > >> > ncubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Plan+and+Status> > > > > >> > > >> > . > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > Thank you very much for everybody effort to resolve > > > > >> > > >> > the > > > > >> identified > > > > >> > > >> issues. > > > > >> > > >> > We are down to 3 open issues - for details please see > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28in > > > > >> > > >> > cubating%29+1. > > > > >> > > >> > 4.0 > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > +Release+Plan+and+Status#ApacheMXNet(incubating)1.4.0ReleasePlanandS > > > +Release+Plan+and+t > > > > >> > > >> > atu > > > > >> > > >> > +Release+Plan+and+s-OpenPRstotrack > > > > >> > > >> > < > > > > >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28i > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > ncubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Plan+and+Status#ApacheMXNet(incubating)1. > > > > >> > > >> > 4.0ReleasePlanandStatus-OpenPRstotrack> > > > > >> > > >> > Please help to resolve the remaining issues and > > > > >> > > >> > integrate > > to > > > > >> v1.4.x > > > > >> > > >> branch. > > > > >> > > >> > Current estimate to address the identified security > > > > >> vulnerabilities > > > > >> > in > > > > >> > > >> the > > > > >> > > >> > Scala/Java package and merge into v1.4.x branch is end > > > > >> > > >> > of > > > next > > > > >> week > > > > >> > > >> > (December 14th) I will communicate as soon I have more > > > > >> information. > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > Regards, > > > > >> > > >> > Steffen > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
