Re: Taxonomy on our cwiki
When the home page was renamed to apache-mxnet from just MXNet it said the page no longer existed, so we should verify anything in the website and update accordingly. On Fri, Jan 18, 2019, 17:20 Haibin Lin +1 > > Will there be broken links? I thought confluence will show "page is now > moved to https://xxx.html; to redirect users, when this kind of reorg > happens. > > Best, > Haibin > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 4:50 PM Aaron Markham > wrote: > > > +1 but note that this is probably going to create a bunch of broken links > > on the MXNet website and maybe elsewhere. Should make time to deal with > > that in this process. > > > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019, 12:43 Carin Meier > > > > +1 Great idea > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 2:38 PM Sheng Zha wrote: > > > > > > > Hi MXNet, > > > > > > > > Given that currently cwiki is the only place other than mxnet website > > for > > > > mxnet-related documentation, I'd like to request your attention to > the > > > > (slightly disorganized) cwiki page of MXNet. The top level folders > (and > > > > their contents) currently looks like this: > > > > - Design Proposals* (bag of proposals, not in order) > > > > - Development* (mixture of guides, roadmaps, processes) > > > > - Release Process (release notes) > > > > - Website (guides and proposals) > > > > - MXNet Clojure (call for contribution, guides) > > > > - MXNet Keras Integration (design) > > > > - MXNet-ONNX Integration (design, dev status) > > > > - MXNet R Package (guide, backlog) > > > > - MXNet-Scala (design, dev status, guide) > > > > - Content Formatting Templates (not a folder but link to two docs) > > > > - How-to articles (1 guide) > > > > - Community (guide on apache-related processes) > > > > - Data IO (designs) > > > > - Continuous Integration (guides, designs) > > > > - Meetups and Hangouts (events) > > > > > > > > And here are two good examples from successful Apache projects: > > > > - Apache Flink: an **audience-oriented** structure [1] > > > > Users (Presentations and How-to) > > > > Contributors (Dev processes and How-to) > > > > Committers (Infra, Dev processes, Release processes, Releases) > > > > Roadmaps and Feature Designs (archive) > > > > - Apache OpenNLP: a **content-oriented** structure [2] > > > > Guides > > > > External Resources > > > > Proposals > > > > Releasing > > > > > > > > Clean organization helps content discovery and saves time on locating > > > > useful content. Given that we have good amount of content on the wiki > > > page, > > > > I suggest that we decide on a cleaner taxonomy, re-organize contents > > > > accordingly, and add future contents accordingly. To provide a > starting > > > > point for the discussion, I suggest: > > > > - Given the state we are in, start with content-oriented > organization, > > > use > > > > these top-level categories: Guides (including processes and how-tos), > > > > Development (including designs, proposals, notes, roadmaps), > Community > > > > (including events, activities, external resources and contents) > > > > - If people strongly prefer audience-oriented structure, later we can > > > adopt > > > > a structure similar to Flink's. > > > > > > > > Feel free to share your thoughts and preferences here. Thanks. > > > > > > > > -sz > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Apache+Flink+Homehttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Apache+Flink+Home > > > > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENNLP/Index > > > > > > > > > >
[ANNOUNCE] Jenkins Nightly Release Pipeline with MXNet Scala
Hi, A little over a month ago, we announced the nightly build of the Scala package on Nexus [1]. It featured the same statically linked binary build logic used by the Python pip to make the adoption as easy for our JVM users as for our python users. However, that release occurred on a private pipeline using code that was not publicly available. First, I would like to thank Sheng for contributing the pip binary build scripts to the community and making them accessible as part of the MXNet repository [2]. Now, everyone can produce similar published artifacts for their own needs and we can better verify the release production code as part of the Jenkins CI. Using his contribution, we have created a new job on the MXNet Jenkins for publishing artifacts on a nightly basis [3]. In order to ensure the highest quality for our releases regardless of user system, it will automatically test the artifacts across other distributions including Ubuntu 16.04, Ubuntu 18.04, and CentOS 7 as part of the deployment. You can find the code for the nightly publish pipeline on the repo [4]. We hope that others can work off of this pipeline to help expand the same static building and thorough testing to additional MXNet packages and language bindings in the future. Special thanks to Qing for his help throughout the project, Sheng for the binary build logic, Marco for his reviews and support working with Jenkins, Anton for setting up the development Jenkins for us, and Frank and Naveen for work on the Scala maven build and deployment. Zach [1] - https://repository.apache.org/#nexus-search;quick~org.apache.mxnet [2] - https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/tree/master/tools/staticbuild [3] - http://jenkins.mxnet-ci.amazon-ml.com/job/restricted-publish-artifacts/job/master/ [4] - https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/tree/master/ci/publish
Re: Taxonomy on our cwiki
+1 Will there be broken links? I thought confluence will show "page is now moved to https://xxx.html; to redirect users, when this kind of reorg happens. Best, Haibin On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 4:50 PM Aaron Markham wrote: > +1 but note that this is probably going to create a bunch of broken links > on the MXNet website and maybe elsewhere. Should make time to deal with > that in this process. > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019, 12:43 Carin Meier > > +1 Great idea > > > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 2:38 PM Sheng Zha wrote: > > > > > Hi MXNet, > > > > > > Given that currently cwiki is the only place other than mxnet website > for > > > mxnet-related documentation, I'd like to request your attention to the > > > (slightly disorganized) cwiki page of MXNet. The top level folders (and > > > their contents) currently looks like this: > > > - Design Proposals* (bag of proposals, not in order) > > > - Development* (mixture of guides, roadmaps, processes) > > > - Release Process (release notes) > > > - Website (guides and proposals) > > > - MXNet Clojure (call for contribution, guides) > > > - MXNet Keras Integration (design) > > > - MXNet-ONNX Integration (design, dev status) > > > - MXNet R Package (guide, backlog) > > > - MXNet-Scala (design, dev status, guide) > > > - Content Formatting Templates (not a folder but link to two docs) > > > - How-to articles (1 guide) > > > - Community (guide on apache-related processes) > > > - Data IO (designs) > > > - Continuous Integration (guides, designs) > > > - Meetups and Hangouts (events) > > > > > > And here are two good examples from successful Apache projects: > > > - Apache Flink: an **audience-oriented** structure [1] > > > Users (Presentations and How-to) > > > Contributors (Dev processes and How-to) > > > Committers (Infra, Dev processes, Release processes, Releases) > > > Roadmaps and Feature Designs (archive) > > > - Apache OpenNLP: a **content-oriented** structure [2] > > > Guides > > > External Resources > > > Proposals > > > Releasing > > > > > > Clean organization helps content discovery and saves time on locating > > > useful content. Given that we have good amount of content on the wiki > > page, > > > I suggest that we decide on a cleaner taxonomy, re-organize contents > > > accordingly, and add future contents accordingly. To provide a starting > > > point for the discussion, I suggest: > > > - Given the state we are in, start with content-oriented organization, > > use > > > these top-level categories: Guides (including processes and how-tos), > > > Development (including designs, proposals, notes, roadmaps), Community > > > (including events, activities, external resources and contents) > > > - If people strongly prefer audience-oriented structure, later we can > > adopt > > > a structure similar to Flink's. > > > > > > Feel free to share your thoughts and preferences here. Thanks. > > > > > > -sz > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Apache+Flink+Homehttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Apache+Flink+Home > > > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENNLP/Index > > > > > >
Re: Taxonomy on our cwiki
+1 but note that this is probably going to create a bunch of broken links on the MXNet website and maybe elsewhere. Should make time to deal with that in this process. On Fri, Jan 18, 2019, 12:43 Carin Meier +1 Great idea > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 2:38 PM Sheng Zha wrote: > > > Hi MXNet, > > > > Given that currently cwiki is the only place other than mxnet website for > > mxnet-related documentation, I'd like to request your attention to the > > (slightly disorganized) cwiki page of MXNet. The top level folders (and > > their contents) currently looks like this: > > - Design Proposals* (bag of proposals, not in order) > > - Development* (mixture of guides, roadmaps, processes) > > - Release Process (release notes) > > - Website (guides and proposals) > > - MXNet Clojure (call for contribution, guides) > > - MXNet Keras Integration (design) > > - MXNet-ONNX Integration (design, dev status) > > - MXNet R Package (guide, backlog) > > - MXNet-Scala (design, dev status, guide) > > - Content Formatting Templates (not a folder but link to two docs) > > - How-to articles (1 guide) > > - Community (guide on apache-related processes) > > - Data IO (designs) > > - Continuous Integration (guides, designs) > > - Meetups and Hangouts (events) > > > > And here are two good examples from successful Apache projects: > > - Apache Flink: an **audience-oriented** structure [1] > > Users (Presentations and How-to) > > Contributors (Dev processes and How-to) > > Committers (Infra, Dev processes, Release processes, Releases) > > Roadmaps and Feature Designs (archive) > > - Apache OpenNLP: a **content-oriented** structure [2] > > Guides > > External Resources > > Proposals > > Releasing > > > > Clean organization helps content discovery and saves time on locating > > useful content. Given that we have good amount of content on the wiki > page, > > I suggest that we decide on a cleaner taxonomy, re-organize contents > > accordingly, and add future contents accordingly. To provide a starting > > point for the discussion, I suggest: > > - Given the state we are in, start with content-oriented organization, > use > > these top-level categories: Guides (including processes and how-tos), > > Development (including designs, proposals, notes, roadmaps), Community > > (including events, activities, external resources and contents) > > - If people strongly prefer audience-oriented structure, later we can > adopt > > a structure similar to Flink's. > > > > Feel free to share your thoughts and preferences here. Thanks. > > > > -sz > > > > [1] > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Apache+Flink+Homehttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Apache+Flink+Home > > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENNLP/Index > > >
Re: Taxonomy on our cwiki
+1 Great idea On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 2:38 PM Sheng Zha wrote: > Hi MXNet, > > Given that currently cwiki is the only place other than mxnet website for > mxnet-related documentation, I'd like to request your attention to the > (slightly disorganized) cwiki page of MXNet. The top level folders (and > their contents) currently looks like this: > - Design Proposals* (bag of proposals, not in order) > - Development* (mixture of guides, roadmaps, processes) > - Release Process (release notes) > - Website (guides and proposals) > - MXNet Clojure (call for contribution, guides) > - MXNet Keras Integration (design) > - MXNet-ONNX Integration (design, dev status) > - MXNet R Package (guide, backlog) > - MXNet-Scala (design, dev status, guide) > - Content Formatting Templates (not a folder but link to two docs) > - How-to articles (1 guide) > - Community (guide on apache-related processes) > - Data IO (designs) > - Continuous Integration (guides, designs) > - Meetups and Hangouts (events) > > And here are two good examples from successful Apache projects: > - Apache Flink: an **audience-oriented** structure [1] > Users (Presentations and How-to) > Contributors (Dev processes and How-to) > Committers (Infra, Dev processes, Release processes, Releases) > Roadmaps and Feature Designs (archive) > - Apache OpenNLP: a **content-oriented** structure [2] > Guides > External Resources > Proposals > Releasing > > Clean organization helps content discovery and saves time on locating > useful content. Given that we have good amount of content on the wiki page, > I suggest that we decide on a cleaner taxonomy, re-organize contents > accordingly, and add future contents accordingly. To provide a starting > point for the discussion, I suggest: > - Given the state we are in, start with content-oriented organization, use > these top-level categories: Guides (including processes and how-tos), > Development (including designs, proposals, notes, roadmaps), Community > (including events, activities, external resources and contents) > - If people strongly prefer audience-oriented structure, later we can adopt > a structure similar to Flink's. > > Feel free to share your thoughts and preferences here. Thanks. > > -sz > > [1] > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Apache+Flink+Homehttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Apache+Flink+Home > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENNLP/Index >
Taxonomy on our cwiki
Hi MXNet, Given that currently cwiki is the only place other than mxnet website for mxnet-related documentation, I'd like to request your attention to the (slightly disorganized) cwiki page of MXNet. The top level folders (and their contents) currently looks like this: - Design Proposals* (bag of proposals, not in order) - Development* (mixture of guides, roadmaps, processes) - Release Process (release notes) - Website (guides and proposals) - MXNet Clojure (call for contribution, guides) - MXNet Keras Integration (design) - MXNet-ONNX Integration (design, dev status) - MXNet R Package (guide, backlog) - MXNet-Scala (design, dev status, guide) - Content Formatting Templates (not a folder but link to two docs) - How-to articles (1 guide) - Community (guide on apache-related processes) - Data IO (designs) - Continuous Integration (guides, designs) - Meetups and Hangouts (events) And here are two good examples from successful Apache projects: - Apache Flink: an **audience-oriented** structure [1] Users (Presentations and How-to) Contributors (Dev processes and How-to) Committers (Infra, Dev processes, Release processes, Releases) Roadmaps and Feature Designs (archive) - Apache OpenNLP: a **content-oriented** structure [2] Guides External Resources Proposals Releasing Clean organization helps content discovery and saves time on locating useful content. Given that we have good amount of content on the wiki page, I suggest that we decide on a cleaner taxonomy, re-organize contents accordingly, and add future contents accordingly. To provide a starting point for the discussion, I suggest: - Given the state we are in, start with content-oriented organization, use these top-level categories: Guides (including processes and how-tos), Development (including designs, proposals, notes, roadmaps), Community (including events, activities, external resources and contents) - If people strongly prefer audience-oriented structure, later we can adopt a structure similar to Flink's. Feel free to share your thoughts and preferences here. Thanks. -sz [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Apache+Flink+Homehttps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Apache+Flink+Home [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OPENNLP/Index
Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
Dear MXNet community - thanks for merging previously agreed PR's into v1.4.x branch. Kellen and Zhennan - what is the ETA for https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13905 ? Please try to merge today. Yuxi asked offline to merge https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13922 to complete Horovod integration. PR will be merged today. After above PR are merge and CI passed successfully 1.4.0.rc1 will be created and voting started. Regards, Steffen On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 2:34 PM kellen sunderland < kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sounds good Steffen. I believe most of these PRs only fix functional > problems (they don't add features) and should be fairly low risk. > > Update from my side: > 13695: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13899 <- Already > merged, thanks Haibin! > > Ready for review / merge with all tests passed: > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13898 > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13900 > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13897 > > -Kellen > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:06 PM Steffen Rochel > wrote: > > > Kellen - thanks, please go ahead. I'm ok as long we avoid risky PR and > can > > get to a stable and tested build by Friday. > > > > Best, > > Steffen > > > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 9:48 PM kellen sunderland < > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Many thanks for the license fixes and allowing some other PRs to come > > into > > > the release. > > > > > > For #13697 I've contacted the author Zhennan and let him know he can > cut > > a > > > branch to v1.4.x to update any APIs that are required. > > > > > > For the other PRs listed here's some new PRs for the v1.4.x branch. > > > 13188: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13898 > > > 13727: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13900 > > > 13695: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13899 <- Already > > > merged, thanks Haibin! > > > > > > I'd also propose that we include this TensorRT PR which fixes inference > > > bugs and updates to a more stable commit of onnx-trt: > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13897 > > > > > > -Kellen > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 5:57 PM Steffen Rochel < > steffenroc...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Lin - please go ahead to integrate into 1.4.x. > > > > Steffen > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:17 PM Lin Yuan > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Steffen, > > > > > > > > > > I would like to ask to include one more PR for 1.4.0.rc1: > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13845 > > > > > > > > > > This PR exports exception handling API of MXNet. It is needed by > > > Horovod > > > > > with MXNet integration to elegantly throw exception at Python level > > > > rather > > > > > than a C++ abort. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > Lin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 2:24 PM Steffen Rochel < > > > steffenroc...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Questions about MXNet Incubation
Am 18. Januar 2019 16:38:14 MEZ schrieb Carin Meier : >Thanks Bob and Isabel for the feedback and answers :) > >Isabel, I took your suggestion and started a thread on dev@community : > >https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b59ac198363bd5691cf2a8ef524643e6838c6ea2b679a0ba97d12d17@%3Cdev.community.apache.org%3E Thanks for that. Now I'm seriously hoping that people will answer... Isabel -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.
Re: Questions about MXNet Incubation
Thanks Bob and Isabel for the feedback and answers :) Isabel, I took your suggestion and started a thread on dev@community : https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b59ac198363bd5691cf2a8ef524643e6838c6ea2b679a0ba97d12d17@%3Cdev.community.apache.org%3E - Carin On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 2:14 AM Isabel Drost-Fromm wrote: > > > Am 17. Januar 2019 00:26:04 MEZ schrieb Bob Paulin : > >> *What are the benefits of graduation for the project and our end > >users?* > >This is one of those: "It's more about the Journey than the end > >destination." Projects that complete incubation have demonstrated that > >they meet a certain bar. And while that by no means guarantee eternal > >success it does mean that you have met the ASF standard for exit which > >is not easy. It means that going forward a report will be submitted to > >the board describing how your project is doing that end users will be > >able to read. This is beyond "How many stars or downloads per month" > >type of stats that let your user community know you're not going away > >anytime soon. One of the criticisms I often hear of the ASF is that > >projects just don't die (usually around some project that they believe > >is old or should be deprecated). To me this is a feature since as > >long > >as people care about the project it can live as long as it wants. > > That's a nice summary of what the goal of having an incubator is. > Something I personally would love to know is what other projects having > gone through the process think of it's benefits and drawbacks, what really > was it that changed on their journey through the incubator and into being a > tlp. > > Carin (or anyone else really), with the 20th anniversary of the ASF coming > up - would you mind starting a thread on the topic over at dev@community > and reach out to other projects (both recently graduated and well > established and popular) and look for some answers to the question? Would > be great if others on this list could help with gathering that > information... > > Isabel > > > -- > Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet. >
