Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

2019-01-07 Thread kellen sunderland 
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  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
> > 
> > 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
> > > 
> > > 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

RE: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

2019-01-07 Thread Lv, Tao A 
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 
> 
> 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 
> > 
> > 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 
> > > >>

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

2019-01-07 Thread Steffen Rochel 
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 
> 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/%3CCAMGgKDC8szdfFqQhhSNpwwT_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/%3CCAMGgKDCi=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 
> > 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+Licenses
> > > 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/ebb8c4c00fb66dd98da13621c7dcb8753fee57562a861d61379d31e9@%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
> > > >>  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

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

2019-01-07 Thread kellen sunderland 
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 
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/%3CCAMGgKDC8szdfFqQhhSNpwwT_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/%3CCAMGgKDCi=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 
> 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+Licenses
> > 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/ebb8c4c00fb66dd98da13621c7dcb8753fee57562a861d61379d31e9@%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 
> > 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 
> > > 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
> > >>  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
> >

[CANCELLED][VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.0.rc0

2019-01-07 Thread Steffen Rochel 
Dear community -
I'm cancelling the vote due to -1 feedback from Justin due to outstanding
licensing issues.  For details see
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ebb8c4c00fb66dd98da13621c7dcb8753fee57562a861d61379d31e9@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E


The MXNet community will address the issues raised and  and send out rc1
for another vote.

Regards,
Steffen

Re: [Annoucement] New Committer -- Iblis Lin

2019-01-07 Thread Tianqi Chen 
Welcome Iblis! Thank you for making MXNet.jl awesome.

Tianqi

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 9:47 AM Chiyuan Zhang  wrote:

> Welcome Iblis! Thank you very much for your hard work and continuous
> efforts on the Julia branch lately!
>
> Best,
> Chiyuan
>
> On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 12:13 PM Carin Meier  wrote:
>
> > Please join me in welcoming Iblis Lin as a new committer.
> >
> > He has been a long time contributor to the Julia package, is responsible
> > for bringing into the main MXNet repo, and is the current maintainer.
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits?author=iblis17
> >
> > - Carin Meier
> >
>

Re: [Annoucement] New Committer -- Iblis Lin

2019-01-07 Thread Chiyuan Zhang 
Welcome Iblis! Thank you very much for your hard work and continuous
efforts on the Julia branch lately!

Best,
Chiyuan

On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 12:13 PM Carin Meier  wrote:

> Please join me in welcoming Iblis Lin as a new committer.
>
> He has been a long time contributor to the Julia package, is responsible
> for bringing into the main MXNet repo, and is the current maintainer.
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits?author=iblis17
>
> - Carin Meier
>

Re: Julia Package Release Process

2019-01-07 Thread Iblis Lin 

I put the note.
I'm fine with leaving the issue tracker at that.

On 1/8/19 1:28 AM, Chiyuan Zhang wrote:

I just checked that I have ability to disable the issue tracker on
dmlc/MXNet.jl. Iblis: let me know if you would like me to disable the issue
(after you transferred active ones to mxnet main repo). Disabling issues
makes the whole 'issues' tab disappear. I think we can also adopt clojure
repo's approach, instead of closing the issues completely, put a note there
to point to the main repo.

Best,
Chiyuan

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 9:13 AM Iblis Lin  wrote:


Yes, I have them on main repo.
But for MXNet.jl, I'm repo collaborator.
Anyway, I'm browsing the issues and migrating some of them.

On 1/8/19 12:46 AM, Chris Olivier wrote:

Do you not have write permissions on mxnet repo?

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:13 AM iblis  wrote:


just found that I don't have the permission to transfer issues of
dmlc/MXNet.jl.
Could anyone help me on this?

On 1/7/19 12:16 PM, iblis wrote:

okay.
Before disabling the issue tracker, I'm going to transfer the issue
from MXNet.jl to main repo.
(via



https://help.github.com/articles/transferring-an-issue-to-another-repository/

)


On 1/7/19 12:17 AM, Chris Olivier wrote:

+1 for disabling issue tracker and putting a note on original repo (if

it

isn’t already there) that work/issue tracking has moved to mxnet

(using

julia label in github or Jira). m


On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 1:19 AM iblis  wrote:


Before PR #10149 got merged (Oct 5, 2018) into main repo,
julia code is developed and maintained in the separate repo --
dmlc/MXNet.jl.

After that PR, there are no further development happened in

dmlc/MXNet.jl.

We work with the main repo now.
But the original MXNet.jl repo is still there, it just isn't deleted

or

archived yet.
I receive some issue ticks from this repo occasionally,
maybe we should just disable the issue tracker of it.


Does it work with other frameworks other than mxnet?

hmm, I'm not sure what you mean.

On 1/6/19 1:18 PM, Chris Olivier wrote:

Curious:  Why is the julia code maintained in a separate repo? I was

under

the impression that it was donated/permanently merged into the mxnet

source

tree.  Does it work with other frameworks other than mxnet?

On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 8:32 PM Iblis Lin 

wrote:



If there is trademark issue, how about this option:
   3) transferring the MXNet.jl repo ownership from DMLC to

Apache.


On 1/6/19 6:45 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:

Hi,


  1) Reuse the old repo: https://github.com/dmlc/MXNet.jl
 It's under DMLC. I have the committer bit of this

repo.


I'm not 100% sure that would be allowed from a branding/trademark

perspective, any distribution owned by a 3rd party can't be called

"Apache

MXNet".



  2) A new repo under ASF's organization?


That seems preferable I think.

Thanks,
Justin



--
Iblis Lin
林峻頤





--
Iblis Lin
林峻頤







--
Iblis Lin
林峻頤





--
Iblis Lin
林峻頤





--
Iblis Lin
林峻頤

Re: Julia Package Release Process

2019-01-07 Thread Chiyuan Zhang 
I just checked that I have ability to disable the issue tracker on
dmlc/MXNet.jl. Iblis: let me know if you would like me to disable the issue
(after you transferred active ones to mxnet main repo). Disabling issues
makes the whole 'issues' tab disappear. I think we can also adopt clojure
repo's approach, instead of closing the issues completely, put a note there
to point to the main repo.

Best,
Chiyuan

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 9:13 AM Iblis Lin  wrote:

> Yes, I have them on main repo.
> But for MXNet.jl, I'm repo collaborator.
> Anyway, I'm browsing the issues and migrating some of them.
>
> On 1/8/19 12:46 AM, Chris Olivier wrote:
> > Do you not have write permissions on mxnet repo?
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:13 AM iblis  wrote:
> >
> >> just found that I don't have the permission to transfer issues of
> >> dmlc/MXNet.jl.
> >> Could anyone help me on this?
> >>
> >> On 1/7/19 12:16 PM, iblis wrote:
> >>> okay.
> >>> Before disabling the issue tracker, I'm going to transfer the issue
> >>> from MXNet.jl to main repo.
> >>> (via
> >>
> https://help.github.com/articles/transferring-an-issue-to-another-repository/
> >> )
> >>>
> >>> On 1/7/19 12:17 AM, Chris Olivier wrote:
>  +1 for disabling issue tracker and putting a note on original repo (if
> >> it
>  isn’t already there) that work/issue tracking has moved to mxnet
> (using
>  julia label in github or Jira). m
> 
> 
>  On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 1:19 AM iblis  wrote:
> 
> > Before PR #10149 got merged (Oct 5, 2018) into main repo,
> > julia code is developed and maintained in the separate repo --
> > dmlc/MXNet.jl.
> >
> > After that PR, there are no further development happened in
> >> dmlc/MXNet.jl.
> > We work with the main repo now.
> > But the original MXNet.jl repo is still there, it just isn't deleted
> or
> > archived yet.
> > I receive some issue ticks from this repo occasionally,
> > maybe we should just disable the issue tracker of it.
> >
> >> Does it work with other frameworks other than mxnet?
> > hmm, I'm not sure what you mean.
> >
> > On 1/6/19 1:18 PM, Chris Olivier wrote:
> >> Curious:  Why is the julia code maintained in a separate repo? I was
> > under
> >> the impression that it was donated/permanently merged into the mxnet
> > source
> >> tree.  Does it work with other frameworks other than mxnet?
> >>
> >> On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 8:32 PM Iblis Lin 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> If there is trademark issue, how about this option:
> >>>   3) transferring the MXNet.jl repo ownership from DMLC to
> Apache.
> >>>
> >>> On 1/6/19 6:45 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
>  Hi,
> 
> >  1) Reuse the old repo: https://github.com/dmlc/MXNet.jl
> > It's under DMLC. I have the committer bit of this
> repo.
> 
>  I'm not 100% sure that would be allowed from a branding/trademark
> >>> perspective, any distribution owned by a 3rd party can't be called
> > "Apache
> >>> MXNet".
> 
> >  2) A new repo under ASF's organization?
> 
>  That seems preferable I think.
> 
>  Thanks,
>  Justin
> 
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Iblis Lin
> >>> 林峻頤
> >>>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Iblis Lin
> > 林峻頤
> >
> 
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Iblis Lin
> >> 林峻頤
> >>
> >
>
> --
> Iblis Lin
> 林峻頤
>

Re: Julia Package Release Process

2019-01-07 Thread Iblis Lin 

Yes, I have them on main repo.
But for MXNet.jl, I'm repo collaborator.
Anyway, I'm browsing the issues and migrating some of them.

On 1/8/19 12:46 AM, Chris Olivier wrote:

Do you not have write permissions on mxnet repo?

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:13 AM iblis  wrote:


just found that I don't have the permission to transfer issues of
dmlc/MXNet.jl.
Could anyone help me on this?

On 1/7/19 12:16 PM, iblis wrote:

okay.
Before disabling the issue tracker, I'm going to transfer the issue
from MXNet.jl to main repo.
(via

https://help.github.com/articles/transferring-an-issue-to-another-repository/
)


On 1/7/19 12:17 AM, Chris Olivier wrote:

+1 for disabling issue tracker and putting a note on original repo (if

it

isn’t already there) that work/issue tracking has moved to mxnet (using
julia label in github or Jira). m


On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 1:19 AM iblis  wrote:


Before PR #10149 got merged (Oct 5, 2018) into main repo,
julia code is developed and maintained in the separate repo --
dmlc/MXNet.jl.

After that PR, there are no further development happened in

dmlc/MXNet.jl.

We work with the main repo now.
But the original MXNet.jl repo is still there, it just isn't deleted or
archived yet.
I receive some issue ticks from this repo occasionally,
maybe we should just disable the issue tracker of it.


Does it work with other frameworks other than mxnet?

hmm, I'm not sure what you mean.

On 1/6/19 1:18 PM, Chris Olivier wrote:

Curious:  Why is the julia code maintained in a separate repo? I was

under

the impression that it was donated/permanently merged into the mxnet

source

tree.  Does it work with other frameworks other than mxnet?

On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 8:32 PM Iblis Lin 

wrote:



If there is trademark issue, how about this option:
  3) transferring the MXNet.jl repo ownership from DMLC to Apache.

On 1/6/19 6:45 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:

Hi,


 1) Reuse the old repo: https://github.com/dmlc/MXNet.jl
It's under DMLC. I have the committer bit of this repo.


I'm not 100% sure that would be allowed from a branding/trademark

perspective, any distribution owned by a 3rd party can't be called

"Apache

MXNet".



 2) A new repo under ASF's organization?


That seems preferable I think.

Thanks,
Justin



--
Iblis Lin
林峻頤





--
Iblis Lin
林峻頤







--
Iblis Lin
林峻頤





--
Iblis Lin
林峻頤

Re: Julia Package Release Process

2019-01-07 Thread Chris Olivier 
Do you not have write permissions on mxnet repo?

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:13 AM iblis  wrote:

> just found that I don't have the permission to transfer issues of
> dmlc/MXNet.jl.
> Could anyone help me on this?
>
> On 1/7/19 12:16 PM, iblis wrote:
> > okay.
> > Before disabling the issue tracker, I'm going to transfer the issue
> > from MXNet.jl to main repo.
> > (via
> https://help.github.com/articles/transferring-an-issue-to-another-repository/
> )
> >
> > On 1/7/19 12:17 AM, Chris Olivier wrote:
> >> +1 for disabling issue tracker and putting a note on original repo (if
> it
> >> isn’t already there) that work/issue tracking has moved to mxnet (using
> >> julia label in github or Jira). m
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 1:19 AM iblis  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Before PR #10149 got merged (Oct 5, 2018) into main repo,
> >>> julia code is developed and maintained in the separate repo --
> >>> dmlc/MXNet.jl.
> >>>
> >>> After that PR, there are no further development happened in
> dmlc/MXNet.jl.
> >>> We work with the main repo now.
> >>> But the original MXNet.jl repo is still there, it just isn't deleted or
> >>> archived yet.
> >>> I receive some issue ticks from this repo occasionally,
> >>> maybe we should just disable the issue tracker of it.
> >>>
>  Does it work with other frameworks other than mxnet?
> >>> hmm, I'm not sure what you mean.
> >>>
> >>> On 1/6/19 1:18 PM, Chris Olivier wrote:
>  Curious:  Why is the julia code maintained in a separate repo? I was
> >>> under
>  the impression that it was donated/permanently merged into the mxnet
> >>> source
>  tree.  Does it work with other frameworks other than mxnet?
> 
>  On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 8:32 PM Iblis Lin 
> wrote:
> 
> > If there is trademark issue, how about this option:
> >  3) transferring the MXNet.jl repo ownership from DMLC to Apache.
> >
> > On 1/6/19 6:45 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >>> 1) Reuse the old repo: https://github.com/dmlc/MXNet.jl
> >>>It's under DMLC. I have the committer bit of this repo.
> >>
> >> I'm not 100% sure that would be allowed from a branding/trademark
> > perspective, any distribution owned by a 3rd party can't be called
> >>> "Apache
> > MXNet".
> >>
> >>> 2) A new repo under ASF's organization?
> >>
> >> That seems preferable I think.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Justin
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Iblis Lin
> > 林峻頤
> >
> 
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Iblis Lin
> >>> 林峻頤
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
> --
> Iblis Lin
> 林峻頤
>

Re: Julia Package Release Process

2019-01-07 Thread Carin Meier 
I think you need admin permissions on both repos to do that which might be
problematic. Since it looks like there is just one recent open issue, can
you replicate it on the main MXNet repo and have a link to the original
issue?

FWIW - When the Clojure package joined the main repo. I just put
instructions on the main page to open issues against the main repo instead
https://github.com/gigasquid/clojure-mxnet

- Carin

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 9:13 AM iblis  wrote:

> just found that I don't have the permission to transfer issues of
> dmlc/MXNet.jl.
> Could anyone help me on this?
>
> On 1/7/19 12:16 PM, iblis wrote:
> > okay.
> > Before disabling the issue tracker, I'm going to transfer the issue
> > from MXNet.jl to main repo.
> > (via
> https://help.github.com/articles/transferring-an-issue-to-another-repository/
> )
> >
> > On 1/7/19 12:17 AM, Chris Olivier wrote:
> >> +1 for disabling issue tracker and putting a note on original repo (if
> it
> >> isn’t already there) that work/issue tracking has moved to mxnet (using
> >> julia label in github or Jira). m
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 1:19 AM iblis  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Before PR #10149 got merged (Oct 5, 2018) into main repo,
> >>> julia code is developed and maintained in the separate repo --
> >>> dmlc/MXNet.jl.
> >>>
> >>> After that PR, there are no further development happened in
> dmlc/MXNet.jl.
> >>> We work with the main repo now.
> >>> But the original MXNet.jl repo is still there, it just isn't deleted or
> >>> archived yet.
> >>> I receive some issue ticks from this repo occasionally,
> >>> maybe we should just disable the issue tracker of it.
> >>>
>  Does it work with other frameworks other than mxnet?
> >>> hmm, I'm not sure what you mean.
> >>>
> >>> On 1/6/19 1:18 PM, Chris Olivier wrote:
>  Curious:  Why is the julia code maintained in a separate repo? I was
> >>> under
>  the impression that it was donated/permanently merged into the mxnet
> >>> source
>  tree.  Does it work with other frameworks other than mxnet?
> 
>  On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 8:32 PM Iblis Lin 
> wrote:
> 
> > If there is trademark issue, how about this option:
> >  3) transferring the MXNet.jl repo ownership from DMLC to Apache.
> >
> > On 1/6/19 6:45 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >>> 1) Reuse the old repo: https://github.com/dmlc/MXNet.jl
> >>>It's under DMLC. I have the committer bit of this repo.
> >>
> >> I'm not 100% sure that would be allowed from a branding/trademark
> > perspective, any distribution owned by a 3rd party can't be called
> >>> "Apache
> > MXNet".
> >>
> >>> 2) A new repo under ASF's organization?
> >>
> >> That seems preferable I think.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Justin
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Iblis Lin
> > 林峻頤
> >
> 
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Iblis Lin
> >>> 林峻頤
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
> --
> Iblis Lin
> 林峻頤
>

Re: Julia Package Release Process

2019-01-07 Thread iblis 

just found that I don't have the permission to transfer issues of dmlc/MXNet.jl.
Could anyone help me on this?

On 1/7/19 12:16 PM, iblis wrote:

okay.
Before disabling the issue tracker, I'm going to transfer the issue
from MXNet.jl to main repo.
(via 
https://help.github.com/articles/transferring-an-issue-to-another-repository/)

On 1/7/19 12:17 AM, Chris Olivier wrote:

+1 for disabling issue tracker and putting a note on original repo (if it
isn’t already there) that work/issue tracking has moved to mxnet (using
julia label in github or Jira). m


On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 1:19 AM iblis  wrote:


Before PR #10149 got merged (Oct 5, 2018) into main repo,
julia code is developed and maintained in the separate repo --
dmlc/MXNet.jl.

After that PR, there are no further development happened in dmlc/MXNet.jl.
We work with the main repo now.
But the original MXNet.jl repo is still there, it just isn't deleted or
archived yet.
I receive some issue ticks from this repo occasionally,
maybe we should just disable the issue tracker of it.


Does it work with other frameworks other than mxnet?

hmm, I'm not sure what you mean.

On 1/6/19 1:18 PM, Chris Olivier wrote:

Curious:  Why is the julia code maintained in a separate repo? I was

under

the impression that it was donated/permanently merged into the mxnet

source

tree.  Does it work with other frameworks other than mxnet?

On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 8:32 PM Iblis Lin  wrote:


If there is trademark issue, how about this option:
 3) transferring the MXNet.jl repo ownership from DMLC to Apache.

On 1/6/19 6:45 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:

Hi,


    1) Reuse the old repo: https://github.com/dmlc/MXNet.jl
   It's under DMLC. I have the committer bit of this repo.


I'm not 100% sure that would be allowed from a branding/trademark

perspective, any distribution owned by a 3rd party can't be called

"Apache

MXNet".



    2) A new repo under ASF's organization?


That seems preferable I think.

Thanks,
Justin



--
Iblis Lin
林峻頤





--
Iblis Lin
林峻頤







--
Iblis Lin
林峻頤

Re: [Annoucement] New Committer -- Iblis Lin

2019-01-07 Thread Hagay Lupesko 
Congrats Iblis!

On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 2:35 PM Steffen Rochel 
wrote:

> Congratulation Ilbis!
>
> On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 1:45 PM Lin Yuan  wrote:
>
> > Welcome Iblis,
> >
> > Great to see a good Julia support in MXNet!
> >
> > Lin
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 12:32 PM Marco de Abreu 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Welcome Iblis,
> > >
> > > great to have you on board!
> > >
> > > -Marco
> > >
> > > Am Sa., 5. Jan. 2019, 21:13 hat Carin Meier 
> > > geschrieben:
> > >
> > > > Please join me in welcoming Iblis Lin as a new committer.
> > > >
> > > > He has been a long time contributor to the Julia package, is
> > responsible
> > > > for bringing into the main MXNet repo, and is the current maintainer.
> > > >
> > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits?author=iblis17
> > > >
> > > > - Carin Meier
> > > >
> > >
> >
>