dev list seems to be reordering my post...To clarify, I am opposed to renaming or making it disappear because of potential distraction, but suggest using MXNet Gluon instead of Gluon, which looks more aligned.
On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:08 PM Junru Shao <[email protected]> wrote: > I feel like MXNet Gluon is a good name. You don't lose customers who have > been familiar with MXNet, nor lose customers who are used to MXNet symbolic. > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:07 PM Davydenko, Denis < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> As subject suggests this is a proposal for re-branding of Gluon to align >> it with MXNet. One of the common things undertaken for re-branding >> exercises is renaming. That's what my thinking behind suggesting new name >> for Gluon. I am sincerely curious what would be alternatives to rebrand >> Gluon to align it with MXNet without changing its name. >> >> >> On 3/22/19, 4:57 PM, "Mu Li" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Are you proposing to rename Gluon? I think Pedro's opinion is about a >> better way to communicate what's Gluon and how it's related to MXNet. >> >> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:54 PM Davydenko, Denis >> <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > I support idea of putting brands of MXNet and Gluon closer >> together. I >> > agree with your argument, Mu, but MXNet is quite far away from TF >> place at >> > this time so I don’t know how well that argument is transferable >> from TF >> > position to MXNet position. >> > >> > MXNet Imperative is definitely too restrictive of a name, we can >> come up >> > with better one... MXNet-M for example, stands for MXNet-Modified >> (military >> > connotation). If naming is the only thing we need to figure out - >> that is a >> > good place to be in __ >> > >> > -- >> > Thanks, >> > Denis >> > >> > On 3/22/19, 4:48 PM, "Mu Li" <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > Gluon is about imperative neural network training and data >> loading. >> > ndarray >> > is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also supports >> > symbolic >> > execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not be a >> good >> > name for >> > it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF talks about >> Keras. >> > >> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang < >> [email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > +1 >> > > >> > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan <[email protected] >> > >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > > +1. >> > > > >> > > > Just to give some of my real experience: >> > > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many responses >> are >> > "This seems >> > > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" >> > > > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who showed >> interests >> > in >> > > MXNet >> > > > but none of the engineers knew the relationship between >> > GluonNLP/GluonCV >> > > > and MXNet >> > > > 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding examples, I >> > received >> > > > comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in >> addition to >> > MXNet?" >> > > > >> > > > Everyone is talking about PyTorch nowadays, but not Caffe2 >> anymore >> > > although >> > > > the latter is still serving as a backend component. Maybe we >> > should also >> > > > doubledown on one brand? >> > > > >> > > > Lin >> > > > >> > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Pedro Larroy < >> > > [email protected] >> > > > > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > Hi dev@ >> > > > > >> > > > > We heard feedback from users that the Gluon name is >> confusing. >> > Some of >> > > > > them don't even know it's MXNet and it's unclear the >> > relationship with >> > > > > MXNet >> > > > > >> > > > > Would it make sense to rebrand Gluon to just MXNet or >> MXNet >> > > > > imperative? Diluting brands and names is never a good >> idea. >> > > > > >> > > > > There's also gluonhq which is related to JavaFX which >> adds to the >> > > > > confusion, search engine friendliness is not high as well. >> > > > > >> > > > > Pedro. >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >>
