Dear MXNet community - Zach & friends made good progress resolving the licensing issues. One more PR on 1.4.x branch is expected today. The code freeze for 1.4.0.rc1 is Thursday Jan 17th 6pm PST. I'm asking the requester to add following PR to 1.4.x branch: Tao: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13882 Kellen: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13697 https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13188 https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13727 https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13695 Pedro: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13535
If there are additional PR to be considered for 1.4.0.rc1 please send request to dev@. Regards, Steffen On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 11:28 AM Qing Lan <lanking...@live.com> wrote: > 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" <kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> > 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 <tao.a...@intel.com> wrote: > > > What should I do for the double headers in > 3rdparty/mkldnn/src/cpu/xbyak/? > > > > -tao > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 10:51 AM > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org > > 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 < > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> 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 > > > <meghnabaijal2...@gmail.com> > > > 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 > > > gKDC8szdfFqQhhSNpwwT_3zi4LBS7A=u4v7kj4ule44u...@mail.gmail.com%3E > > > > > > > > > 3. General Request for review of the licenses wiki < > > > > > > > > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mxnet-dev/201801.mbox/%3CCAM > > > GgKDCi=s933zcVWwei15i5uBC1h88VUogt3Br=Vq28=vi...@mail.gmail.com%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 > > > > <steffenroc...@gmail.com> > > > > 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 < > > > steffenroc...@gmail.com> > > > > > 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 < > > > haibin.lin....@gmail.com> > > > > > > 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 < > > > > > >> pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com> > > > > > >> 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 < > > > > > >> steffenroc...@gmail.com> > > > > > >> > 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 < > > > > > >> steffenroc...@gmail.com> > > > > > >> > > 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 < > > > > > patric.z...@intel.com> > > > > > >> > 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: > steffenroc...@gmail.com] > > > > > >> > > >> > Sent: Saturday, December 8, 2018 1:12 AM > > > > > >> > > >> > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org > > > > > >> > > >> > 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 > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
