Hi to all, from a users perspective: the major problem with mxnet/gluon is that mxnet is not advertised enough. But it is picking up. Until recently gluoncv and gluon-nlp weren't on the official repository, so it makes sense people not knowing them (after all, they are both very young). I think a key reason for the confusion between mxnet and gluon, gluon being a high level API for mxnet, is because in the official announcement from amazon ( https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/introducing-gluon-a-new-library-for-machine-learning-from-aws-and-microsoft/), it was mentioned that gluon will support other frameworks as well (e.g. CNTK), so it is not clear (officially) if it will remain only on mxnet (I find it hard to see it differently).
In the DL world, the name mxnet is a synonym to performance. I think you want to keep that. All the best. mxnet is amazing work. Thank you for all your efforts. Foivos On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 9:06 AM Lin Yuan <apefor...@gmail.com> wrote: > @Junru Thanks for the clarification. Given that we already have courseware > and books with Gluon, it makes sense to brand “Mxnet Gluon” with Gluon > being the high level API of mxnet > > @Tianqi what’s the roadmap of GluonNLP/GluonCV? Are they positioned to be > high level API of MXnet or some plug-and-play components that could > potentially be put on top of other frameworks in the future? If the former, > should we always highlight Mxnet whenever we advertise GluonNLP? > > Thanks > > Lin > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:41 PM Tianqi Chen <tqc...@cs.washington.edu> > wrote: > > > Change the name gluon will result in a significant problem of backward > > compatibility for many of the current users, and that would be a huge -1 > > for the current community. > > One possibility is to do that is to have a clear roadmap of 2.0(which > gives > > the message of non-backward compatible) and we can discuss which features > > consolidate, but perhaps that will require a bit more thoughts and > > coordinated effort. > > > > Tianqi > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:39 PM Junru Shao <junrushao1...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > @Tianqi For sure GluonCV and GluonNLP should go with the current name. > No > > > reason to change. > > > > > > @Lin If customers are interested, I guess we could say they are awesome > > > toolkits built on top of MXNet Gluon API, and perfect illustration to > > write > > > clever and powerful code on the top of it. > > > > > >
