Re: [VOTE] Separating PMC and Committership

[Sebastian]

+1 (binding)

On 05.11.18 11:29, Carin Meier wrote:

This is a procedural vote on whether to separate the committer and PPMC
levels in the project. The current state is that a user is considered as
both a committer and a PPMC member at the same time. This vote is to change
that to be able to invite a person in as a committer separately from a PPMC
member.

Document reference:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Become+an+Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+Committer+and+PPMC+Member

Discussion thread:
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9c6ecda02e081aa6b689c92badc9dcf05ced6fb3691fd370471773d1@%3Cdev.mxnet.apache.org%3E

The vote will be a procedural issue vote as defined
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html

Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule unless
otherwise stated. That is, if there are more favourable votes than
unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have passed -- regardless of
the number of votes in each category. (If the number of votes seems too
small to be representative of a community consensus, the issue is typically
not pursued. However, see the description of lazy consensus
 for a
modifying factor.)

The vote will run until Friday Nov 9th at 6:00 am EST

Thanks,
Carin

Re: [VOTE] - Adopt "Become a Committer and PPMC Member" Document

[Sebastian]

+1 (binding)

On 30.10.18 12:37, Steffen Rochel wrote:

+1 non-binding
Thanks for driving the vote Carin!

On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 9:31 AM Carin Meier  wrote:


Sure PPMC stands for Podling Project Management Committee -
https://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html - I updated the document to
have  ",(Podling Project Management Committee)," in the both sections with
a link where the abbreviation is first introduced.

- Carin

On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 12:09 PM Aaron Markham 
wrote:


+1 non-binding
One minor thing first: can you define PPMC in the doc? It's brought in
without saying what it stands for. Even the link it goes to just talks
about PMC and there's no mention of PMCC... so I'm not sure what the
definition is.


On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 8:07 AM Carin Meier 

wrote:



 From the feedback in the thread. I changed the wording of "Privileges"

to

"Rights and Responsibilities".

If I misunderstood anything, please let me know.

Best,
Carin

On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 7:00 AM Sergio Fernández 
wrote:


+1 since the Beam model is much more open than the current one.

Here my two cents to the discussion:

You can see that in the past was different,, but we had evolved as
foundation. As general recommendation, the new way is to spend less

effort

in ad-hoc bylaws on every project/podling and adopt the general ones.

The

easier the project is managed, normally the better the community

evolves.


In addition, as a linguistic detail: commiters and/or pmc do not have

more

"privileges", but "responsibilities".

Cheers,

On Mon, Oct 29, 2018, 15:47 Carin Meier 

wrote:



This vote is to adopt the document









https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Become+an+Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+Committer+and+PPMC+Member+Proposal

to replace the current document


https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Becoming+a+Committer


The dev discussion thread is here









https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/e61ffa26af374de7a99c475d406e462a00b26cfc1155e232198dd53e@%3Cdev.mxnet.apache.org%3E


The vote will be a procedural issue vote as defined
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html

Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority

rule

unless

otherwise stated. That is, if there are more favourable votes than
unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have passed --

regardless

of

the number of votes in each category. (If the number of votes seems

too

small to be representative of a community consensus, the issue is

typically

not pursued. However, see the description of lazy consensus
 for

a

modifying factor.)

The vote will run until Friday Nov 2nd at 6:00 am EST

Thanks,
Carin

Re: Enable Travis CI for Apache MXNet

[Sebastian]

Done, here is the ticket:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-17004

On 10.09.2018 14:49, Marco de Abreu wrote:

Hello Sebastian,

could you please file a ticket with Apache Infra to enable Travis CI for
our main repository? The discussion thread is available at
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3871eb5a7bc31eb467f68935f4a56469292b03a33f1693cdb9a98f31@%3Cdev.mxnet.apache.org%3E
.

The settings should be branch- as well as PR-validation. The reported
status should be set to "not required", thus not blocking any PRs if that
validation pipeline fails.

Best regards,
Marco

Re: http://incubator.apache.org/projects/mxnet.html updated

[Sebastian]

Hi Carin,

I pushed the changes, you should appear on the extra slot soon :)

-s

On 13.08.2018 00:27, Carin Meier wrote:

It looks great!

Just a minor correction that Macro is listed twice, but you can use the
extra slot and add me in :)

- Cain

On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 5:16 PM Steffen Rochel 
wrote:


I would like to thank Sebastian for his help to update
http://incubator.apache.org/projects/mxnet.html
Please have a look and let me know if you see errors, omissions or other
needs for improvement.

Regards,
Steffen  .


On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 8:49 AM Steffen Rochel 
wrote:


http://incubator.apache.org/projects/mxnet.html is outdated and missing
information like mentors, committers, poddling reports, user@ etc.
Anybody with write permission interested to collaborate to update the

page?


Regards,
Steffen

Ticket for github bot account

[Sebastian]

Hi,

I created the INFRA ticket for the bot account here

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-16884

Best,
Sebastian

Re: users@mxnet

[Sebastian]

I am puzzled by the reluctance of this project to setup a user 
mailinglist to be honest.


MXNet has major issues with attracting a community outside of Amazon 
(whenever I hear folks talking about deep learning, they usually mention 
tensorflow, pytorch and keras, but I rarely hear someone talk about 
MXNet). At the same time, there is so much resistance to adopt practices 
that are successfully used by many high-profile toplevel projects...


-s

On 18.06.2018 20:37, Timur Shenkao wrote:

Facebook is definitely a bad idea: we will be dependent on third party
provider + unclear who & how manages such group etc.
Forum + Confluence + Slack is  much better then.

On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 7:17 PM, Ivan Serdyuk 
wrote:


Greetings Barber, Christopher. I had an idea to move out some discussions,
covering Java and Scala API, to Facebook. So if somewhere exists a local
JUG or Scala user group - they could reflect the topic of discussion. But
background stuff could take place on mailing lists, Slack, forum, whatever.
The reverse mechanism could be used to involve new committers, as well (so
they would appear as presented newcomers, as for contributions).

Regards
Ivan

On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 8:40 PM, Barber, Christopher <
christopher.bar...@analog.com> wrote:


I don't understand why you would want a users mailing list when you
already have discussion forums. Users that want to be notified of new

posts

on the forum can configure their notification preferences appropriately.
The traffic on the forums is already pretty low. I would think you would
not want to dilute that further.

Christopher

On 6/18/18, 1:27 PM, "Jim Jagielski"  wrote:

 users@ mailing lists have great societal advantages that one
shouldn't ignore...

 And it's not like this is the only project with "multiple"
communication choices for users. Most, if not all, projects have users@in
addition to such supplemental methods as IRC channels, a forum, etc...

It's

about making it easy to have as many users as possible and as many
potential ways for users to communicate. It's not confusing; it's
empowering :)

 > On Jun 18, 2018, at 1:19 PM, Tianqi Chen 
 > The problem of having multiple separate channels of communication

is

that
 > users get confused, and the cost of maintenance goes up(people have
to
 > watch both). As the current community was at discuss forum and many
users
 > prefer it, having a mail-list is only a burden we will bring
 >
 > Tianqi
 >
 > On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 9:48 AM, Jim Jagielski 
wrote:
 >
 >> IMO, that is the wrong way to look at it.
 >>
 >> A users@ mailing list is a great, easy, low-cost and low-overhead
way of
 >> *increasing* the user community and providing an extra level of
support.
 >> Unless there is "strong evidence" that this is NOT the case, I

would

 >> recommend we create the list.
 >>
 >>> On Jun 16, 2018, at 12:28 AM, Tianqi Chen <
tqc...@cs.washington.edu>
 >> wrote:
 >>>
 >>> So unless there is a strong evidence that our community users
prefers the
 >>> mail-list, I would recommend we keep the current way
 >>>
 >>> Tianqi
 >>>
 >>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 9:25 PM, Sergio Fernández <
wik...@apache.org>
 >> wrote:
 >>>
 >>>> Are we targeting just Seattle as our community? I really hope we
are
 >>>> thinking a bit beyond that...
 >>>>
 >>>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018, 21:22 Tianqi Chen <

tqc...@cs.washington.edu



 >> wrote:
 >>>>
 >>>>> I remember last time during the mxnet meetup in Seattle, we

did a

 >> survey,
 >>>>> and most users preferred the current discuss forum. So I would
say we
 >>>> stick
 >>>>> with that given the user community prefers that
 >>>>>
 >>>>> Tianqi
 >>>>>
 >>>>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 9:13 PM, Sergio Fernández <
wik...@apache.org>
 >>>>> wrote:
 >>>>>
 >>>>>> Then, if everybody agree, let's request the mailing list
creation to
 >>>>> INFRA
 >>>>>> ;-)
 >>>>>>
 >>>>>> Marco, I wouldn't do that. Typically developers are also
subscribed
 >>>>> there,
 >>>>>> since they may be the most informed people for answering

users'

 >>>>> questions.
 >>>>>> But the topics discussed there may not be of the interest for
pure
 >>>>>> development purposes. Some di

Re: About Becoming a Committer

[Sebastian]

On 16.06.2018 10:57, Pedro Larroy wrote:

Hi Sebastian.

Thank you for your comment. That's why I said "I would propose", because I
don't know if it's possible as my experience with Apache is limited to the
MXNet project.

How do you interpret this part?: "Since the appointed Project Management
Committees have the power to create their own self-governing rules, there
is no single vision on how PMCs should run a project and the communities
they host."


A podling can decide on many things, e.g.,

 * what the bar for committership should be
 * whether to automatically make committers PMC members
 * rules for commits (e.g., whether you need an ok from a second committer)

However, a podling cannot change the fundamental rules of how Apache 
works (a podling can however decide to leave the incubator and run the 
project under their own umbrella according to their own rules).


-s

Re: About Becoming a Committer

[Sebastian]

I would propose the two following action points:

  * Resetting the list of committers to people that have contributed in the
previous terms in the latest 6 months
  * Suspend veto rights temporarily and use simple majority for decisions
that need a vote so we realign the project with the communities best
interests.


None of this is possible within the structure of the ASF, please get 
familiar with how the ASF works before making such proposals.


https://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html

Re: users@mxnet

[Sebastian]

I have already proposed this many times in the past and would strongly 
encourage it.


-s

On 15.06.2018 21:56, Sergio Fernández wrote:

Hi,

is there any good reason why the podling doesn't have a users@ mailing list
yet?

Honestly speaking, I'm not a big fan of the other tools the podling is
using. Slack and Web forums a cool tools, and I used them a lot in other
contexts. But when it comes to transparency and community, mailing lists
play a crucial role in the Apache Way.

Users are the most important asset a project can have. Even more than
developers, believe me. So I think it's time to create a users@ mailing
list for to helping MXNet grow its community beyong the core team.

Cheers,

"What does the Apache board do"

[Sebastian]

Hi,

I just came across a video where two of the directors of the ASF talk 
about what the board looks for in healthy apache projects. (Note that 
they look at top level projects only and things are a little different 
in the incubator). However, I still think this video contains many 
useful views, especially for the MXNet community:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jm_whow_zxk

Best,
Sebastian

Re: Vote to stop using JIRA

[Sebastian]

Looks like they also don't handle the committer nomination process 
correctly ...


"If you are interested in becoming a Weex committer, contact any 
existing committer and we will help you go through the invitation process."


On 11.06.2018 05:31, Yasser Zamani wrote:



On 6/10/2018 4:53 AM, Marco de Abreu wrote:

Thanks a lot, this sounds like a good start. We definitely do not want to
re-invent the wheel - if there's some setup we can copy, I'd love to do
that as well!

Something we need is the possibility to have projects with subtasks and the
ability for any contributor (not committer) to contribute to these
projects. This could be adding tasks, changing the state of a task, maybe
even labelling and other things you usually do if you work on systems like
a Kanban-board. We want to give contributors the possibility to manage a
project entirely on their own without much involvement of committers.



I researched Apache Incubator Projects to find most similar project to
MXNet and found weex [1] which has these similar properties:

Several expertise: Java, JavaScript, Objective-C, C++, Objective-C++.
High revolutionary commits and issues: [2] [3].
High number of concurrent contributors: [2] ( ~ 1/4 MXNet).

Although it isn't as hard to manage as MXNet but I found these very
helpful and good things there:

- They have been disabled GitHub issues but use Pull Request with JIRA.
- They have contribution protocols [4] (e.g. how PR JIRA connection).
- They have defined How to Contribute [5] Bug Report Guidelines [6] and
Development Process [7].

Additionally, with a lot of thanks to your keyword "Kanban-board", I
found following hopeful amazing things about JIRA:

* Learn kanban with Jira software [8].
* Learn how to create agile boards in Jira Software [9].
* JIRA: Monitoring work in a Kanban project [10].
* What is kanban? [11].

I'm new to these and MXNet and firstly I was planned to have code
contributions, but now, it will be my honor and motivation if you @dev
have time to let me research these and come back with good setup and
docs in a timely manner. Or we can also ask in @dev if anyone has such
experiences and can bring us such setup and docs customized to MXNet.

Warm Regards.

[1] http://weex.incubator.apache.org/
[2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-weex/graphs/contributors
[3]
https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/WEEX/issues/WEEX-450?filter=allissues
[4] https://github.com/apache/incubator-weex/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md
[5] http://weex.incubator.apache.org/contributing.html
[6] http://weex.incubator.apache.org/bug-report-guidelines.html
[7] http://weex.incubator.apache.org/development-process.html
[8]
https://www.atlassian.com/agile/tutorials/how-to-do-kanban-with-jira-software
[9] https://www.atlassian.com/agile/tutorials/creating-your-agile-board
[10]
https://confluence.atlassian.com/jirasoftwarecloud/monitoring-work-in-a-kanban-project-764478148.html
[11] https://www.atlassian.com/agile/kanban

Re: Permission to delete tasks on MXNET Jira

[Sebastian]

I deleted the respective tasks.

On 25.05.2018 18:31, Alex Zai wrote:

Hello,
I recently created a few tasks (Task MXNET-461 to MXNET-469) in the MXNet
Jira page (
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/RapidBoard.jspa?rapidView=211=MXNET).
It was intended to be created as a subtask under MXNET-425. I do not have
permission to change the status of these tasks or to delete them. Could
someone convert these tasks to subtasks or delete them?

Best,
Alex

Re: blog for MXNet

[Sebastian Gutierrez]

Aaron and Thomas

Great ideas!

One thing worth also considering is something like

https://www.r-bloggers.com/

What it does is serve as a blog aggregation service for all of the people
who have blogged about r topics. Because of the central repository nature,
it serves as a natural gathering point and allows people not using RSS (or
similar technologies) to keep up to date with what is happening.

Another thing worth considering is a job board / site for MXNet full time /
part time / remote jobs.  The data vis community has this free email list
service
https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!forum/data-vis-jobs that's very
community friendly and is a good place for people to gather to see job
needs.

All the best
Sebastian Gutierrez


On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 6:10 PM Thomas DELTEIL <thomas.delte...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thanks Aaron, I like medium, a lot of projects seems to be posting their
> articles there, as you mentioned.
>
> Note that there is a newly created Chinese MXNet blog here:
> https://zh.mxnet.io/blog/
>
> I would be happy to contribute to the blogs, if you want to add me to the
> writer/editor list.
>
>
>
> Also, there is a mxnet subreddit r/mxnet which was created by Sebastian
> (thanks!) and I am now a moderator as well. Feel free to cross-post any
> interesting content there! https://www.reddit.com/r/mxnet/  Please
> subscribe!
>
>
> I will try to post one link a day at least, until I run out of links ☺ We
> will also improve the look of it this week and add links to relevant
> resources on the side bar, etc.
>
>
>
> All the best,
>
>
> Thomas
>
>
> 2018-04-11 14:45 GMT-07:00 Aaron Markham <aaron.s.mark...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Having a blog for MXNet would be very useful for conveying news,
> > talking about features, demoing applications, and building awareness.
> >
> > Does anyone have particular preferences or recommendations on blog
> > hosting or platform?
> >
> > I currently have editor access for an MXNet branded account on Medium.
> > https://medium.com/mxnet
> >
> > There's nothing there at the moment, but at least with Medium we all
> > could get started right away, and have a built-in syndication
> > platform. Also, note that this is where the TensorFlow blog resides:
> > https://medium.com/tensorflow
> >
> > Please make it known if you'd like to contribute, so you can get
> > writer/editor access (to whichever platform we settle on.)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Aaron
> >
>

fyi: deep learning framework mentions on arXiv over the past 3 months

[Sebastian]

https://twitter.com/fchollet/status/971863128341323776

Re: Regarding joining slack channel

[Sebastian]

It took us quite some effort to move everyone to the ASF supported slack 
channel, so I don't see the point of moving away from that.


-s

On 15.02.2018 13:26, Pedro Larroy wrote:

What's the situation with slack vs gitter?  Should we just move all
the discussion to gitter? there was never any significant traffic in
the slack channel anyway.

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 10:20 PM, Chris Olivier  wrote:

invited

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 1:10 PM, Chen HY  wrote:


Hi there,

I am just wondering whether it is possible to join slack and to
participate in development.

Thanks
Hanyang

Re: Module maintainers proposal

[Sebastian Schelter]

+1

2018-01-16 9:08 GMT+01:00 Isabel Drost-Fromm :

> Hi,
>
>
>
> Am 16. Januar 2018 01:40:48 MEZ schrieb Steffen Rochel <
> steffenroc...@gmail.com>:
> ># Anybody can add themselves or a team as additional contributors
> ># to get notified about changes in a specific package.
> ># See https://help.github.com/articles/about-teams how to setup teams.
> >
> >Hope we can adopt this approach.
>
> Once you run with that approach: As to my knowledge you are the first
> project at Apache using the code owners function, it would be great if you
> could track its usage and impact on your community in coming incubator/
> board reports.
>
> When first mentioning it, make sure though to either point ppl to this
> thread or explain its intended use to avoid running into a second wave of
> warnings about things discussed here already.
>
> Isabel
>
> --
> Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.
>

Infra ticket created for switching the PR validation strategy

[Sebastian]

FYI: I created a ticket for infra to switch the pr validation strategy 
as decided upon in 
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/2b0d3ef47c3c9e67b2c99f2bea089ad3879fc523657cab676e5ff891@%3Cdev.mxnet.apache.org%3E


https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-15833

Best,
Sebastian

Re: Podling Report Reminder - January 2018

[Sebastian]

done.

On 01.01.2018 03:51, Markus Weimer wrote:

Done. -- Markus

On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Suneel Marthi  wrote:


Report's been filed - mentors please comment and sign-off

On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Suneel Marthi 
wrote:


I'll post the report to Incubator Wiki sometime today - mentors can then
sign off.

On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Markus Weimer  wrote:


Thanks for putting this together! I made a pass and left one comment.
Besides that, it looks good to me and documents immense progress. Great
job
:)

Regarding the timeline for mentor sign-off, this is challenging.

I believe the way that I sign off on the report is to log into the
incubator wiki and adding an `x` at the right spot. It isn't enough for
you
to copy & paste that from the Google doc.

The timeline set here gives exactly 1 day for us to do that, which
$DAY_JOB
might make challenging. I should be able to make it this time, but can't
really promise that in the future. Any chance we can get this into the
wiki
earlier in the future?

Thanks!

Markus

On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 9:39 PM, Suk Won Kim 
wrote:


Hi all,
Bhavin Thaker and I propose the attached podling report draft and

would

like your review comments and contributions to the report by 02-Jan,

2018,

since the report is due on 03-Jan, 2018. Mentors, please signoff this

draft

via email by 1/2/2018 since we plan to submit the report by 1/3.

Please find the draft below.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PGhs96klZB6DXhpK9_
biPh4-aCm8-bWwFzexnOW_GMA/edit




On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 6:30 AM,  wrote:


Dear podling,

This email was sent by an automated system on behalf of the Apache
Incubator PMC. It is an initial reminder to give you plenty of time

to

prepare your quarterly board report.

The board meeting is scheduled for Wed, 17 January 2018, 10:30 am

PDT.

The report for your podling will form a part of the Incubator PMC
report. The Incubator PMC requires your report to be submitted 2

weeks

before the board meeting, to allow sufficient time for review and
submission (Wed, January 03).

Please submit your report with sufficient time to allow the

Incubator

PMC, and subsequently board members to review and digest. Again, the
very latest you should submit your report is 2 weeks prior to the

board

meeting.

Thanks,

The Apache Incubator PMC

Submitting your Report

--

Your report should contain the following:

*   Your project name
*   A brief description of your project, which assumes no knowledge

of

 the project or necessarily of its field
*   A list of the three most important issues to address in the move
 towards graduation.
*   Any issues that the Incubator PMC or ASF Board might wish/need

to

be

 aware of
*   How has the community developed since the last report
*   How has the project developed since the last report.
*   How does the podling rate their own maturity.

This should be appended to the Incubator Wiki page at:

https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/January2018

Note: This is manually populated. You may need to wait a little

before

this page is created from a template.

Mentors
---

Mentors should review reports for their project(s) and sign them off

on

the Incubator wiki page. Signing off reports shows that you are
following the project - projects that are not signed may raise

alarms

for the Incubator PMC.

Incubator PMC





--
*Sukwon Kim*

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet(incubating) version 1.0.0.rc0

[Sebastian]

+1 (binding)

verified signature, verified building from source

On 25.11.2017 01:00, Chris Olivier wrote:

This is the vote to release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.0.0.

Voting will start now (Friday, November 24, 2017) and

will remain open for 72 hours.


Link to release notes:

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/
Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.0+Release+Notes


Link to release candidate 1.0.0.rc0:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/mxnet/1.0.0.rc0/


View this page and scroll down to “Build from Source” to build this project:

https://mxnet.incubator.apache.org/install/index.html


The release tag can be found here:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/tree/1.0.0.rc0

(Note: The README.md points to the 1.0.0 tag and does not work at the
moment.)


We are planning to have the MXNet version 1.0.0 release ready before the
NIPS conference that starts on 04-Dec, 2017 and your timely response for
the vote will be highly appreciated.

Please make sure you TEST before you vote accordingly:

+1 = approve

+0 = no opinion

-1 = disapprove (provide reason)

Re: [VOTE] A Separate CI System for Apache MXNet (incubating)

[Sebastian]

+1 for 1)  (binding)

On 10.11.2017 10:30, kellen sunderland wrote:

+1 for 1 (non-binding)

On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 6:37 AM, Chris Olivier 
wrote:


+1 for 1) — Jenkins


On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 9:14 PM Naveen Swamy  wrote:


+1 on 1)


On Nov 9, 2017, at 8:59 PM, Steffen Rochel 

wrote:


voting for [1]
We will need to setup testing on MAC. I will explore for AWS to cover

the

costs.
Steffen

On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 4:41 PM Meghna Baijal <

meghnabaijal2...@gmail.com


wrote:


Hi All,
A need has been identified for MXNet’s CI/CD setup to move away from

the

Apache Jenkins Service. Over the past few days there has been active
discussion on the necessary and advanced features for such a system

and

the

various options available. These are being tracked in this Google Doc
<

https://docs.google.com/document/d/17PEasQ2VWrXi2Cf7IGZSWGZMawxDk

dlavUDASzUmLjk/edit>

(and

are also in the pdf attached).

I would like to start a vote to choose the framework for this new

CI/CD

system. The options are -
[1] Jenkins (A setup separated from Apache Jenkins) - with various

plugins

[2] TeamCity
[3] Travis CI
[4] GitLabCI
[5] BuildBot
[6] Other - Please Name

Please feel free to add a comment to support your choice.
This vote will be open from now until the end of the day on Monday
11/13/2017

Thanks,
Meghna Baijal

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet(incubating) version 0.12.1.rc0

[Sebastian]

+1 (binding)

verified signature, built from source.

On 08.11.2017 04:51, Chris Olivier wrote:

+1 Binding


On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 7:48 PM Meghna Baijal 
wrote:


This is the vote to release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 0.12.1.

Voting will start now (Tuesday, November 7, 2017) and

close Friday, November 10, 2017


Link to release notes:


https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+0.12.1+Release+Notes


Link to release candidate 0.12.1.rc0:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/mxnet/0.12.1.rc0/


View this page and scroll down to “Build from Source” to build this
project:

https://mxnet.incubator.apache.org/install/index.html


The release tag can be found here:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/tree/0.12.1.rc0

(Note: The README.md points to the 0.12.1 tag and does not work at the
moment.)



Please make sure you TEST before you vote accordingly:


+1 = approve


+0 = no opinion


-1 = disapprove (provide reason)



Thanks,

Meghna Baijal

Re: mxnet slack channel request

[Sebastian]

Invite sent.

On 06.11.2017 06:25, Jeongyeol Choe wrote:

Hi,

I've just subscribed mxnet.
Then I am willing to join mxnet slack channel.
Thanks in advance.

Best regards,

Jeongyeol

Re: Grant access to slack

[Sebastian Schelter]

Hi Matthias,

Channels of interest for you might be #mxnet and #mxnet-builds.

Best,
Sebastian

2017-11-01 17:20 GMT+01:00 Suneel Marthi <suneel.mar...@gmail.com>:

> Invite sent
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Nov 1, 2017, at 6:17 PM, Matthias Seeger <msee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I got a few PRs merged into MXNet already (github mseeger). Could you
> grant
> > me access to slack, and give me details on the channel?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Seeger
>

Re: Draft of blog post for MXNet v0.12 release

[Sebastian]

A few small things:

In the paragraph about volta support, I'd rather talk about "users" than 
"customers". Also the reference to the imagenet training script seems to 
be a bit out of context.


In the following paragraph there is a typo: "allowing developerto" 
should be "allowing developers to".


Best,
Sebastian


On 01.11.2017 01:27, sandeep krishnamurthy wrote:

Thank you, Henry, for the help.


Regards,
Sandeep

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Hen <bay...@apache.org> wrote:


It was noted that you've signed up. I've added you to the blog Sandeep :)

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Hen <bay...@apache.org> wrote:


Confirmed on the email.

Can you sign in at blogs.apache.org using your Apache LDAP credentials
please?

That will add you to the pool of users, and then one of the mentors can
add you to the blog :)

Hen


On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 2:08 PM, sandeep krishnamurthy <
sandeep.krishn...@gmail.com> wrote:


Hello Hen,

I can help in publishing the blog post at blogs.apache.org/MXNet with
contents from draft by Sukwon posted here for review from community -
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Draft+of+
blog+post+for+MXNet+v0.12+release


Just confirming here - after we post the blog, we will be emailing to -

"

annou...@apache.org" and "dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org" with the blog
link. Correct?

Regards,
Sandeep

On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 4:48 PM, Hen <bay...@apache.org> wrote:


Related question - which committer wants to publish the blog? It needs

to

be a member of the project.

On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Sally Khudairi <s...@apache.org>

wrote:



Thanks, Sukwon; hello Chris and MXNet pPMC.

I have been discussing this with Sukwon and have agreed on the
following tactics:
1) blog post published on blogs.apache.org/MXNet from the pPMC;
2) email sent to annou...@apache.org and the Apache MXNet

(incubating)

lists; and3) Sally will include in the Apache Weekly News

Round-up

once

the email
to announce@ is in the archives
There is no formal press activity surrounding this release, nor is

there

any official ASF publicity on this release, as the project is still
undergoing incubation.
Kind regards,
Sally

- - -
Vice President Marketing & Publicity
The Apache Software Foundation

Tel +1 617 921 8656
Skype sallykhudairi


On Mon, Oct 30, 2017, at 19:11, Suk Won Kim wrote:

Yes,
I have been in touch with Sally for this post, and she is aware
of this.> It will not be published via official press release.

On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 4:10 PM, Chris Mattmann
<mattm...@apache.org> wrote:>> Has this been in coordination with

Sally? There’s a pretty hard and

fast Incubator rule to not promote>>  Podlings via official press

channels – where will this be published?>>

  Cheers,
  Chris




  On 10/30/17, 4:08 PM, "Suk Won Kim" <kim.suk...@gmail.com>

wrote:


  Created a page in cwiki for a draft of blog post for MXNet

v0.12

  release.
  https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/

Draft+of+blog+post+for+MXNet+v0.12+release


  Thanks.
  --

 *Sukwon Kim, *>>






--
*Sukwon Kim, *

Senior Product Manager-Technical,
Amazon Web Services (AWS) EC2









--
Sandeep Krishnamurthy

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) Version 0.12.0.rc0

[Sebastian]

There was also a binding +1 from me :)

On 28.10.2017 23:08, Zha, Sheng wrote:

Who’s executing?

Best regards,
-sz

On 10/24/17, 4:50 PM, "Meghna Baijal"  wrote:

 Hi All,
 The vote for releasing Apache MXNet (incubating) 0.12.0 RC0 passed with the
 following result -
 
 +1 binding

 - Chris Olivier
 - Suneel Marthi
 - Indhu Bharathi
 
 +1 non-binding

 - Gautam Kumar
 
 There was no -1 and 0
 
 Vote thread :

 
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/800402860be8a1b4055ede075ab465af48b7f8d041b42217372a63b9@%3Cdev.mxnet.apache.org%3E
 
 I am now going to create a vote on the general@ list.
 
 Thanks,

 Meghna Baijal
 

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 0.12.0.rc0

[Sebastian]

Ok, nevermind :)

On 21.10.2017 07:58, Suneel Marthi wrote:

Downloads fine for me @ssc, I am on a horribly slow wifi connection on a
Trans-Atlantic flight - it worked for me.

On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 1:37 AM, Meghna Baijal <meghnabaijal2...@gmail.com>
wrote:


I verified again, on an ubuntu instance this time. Worked without the ‘g’

sha512sum --check  ./apache-mxnet-src-0.12.0.rc0-incubating.tar.gz.sha512

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 10:16 PM, Sebastian <ssc.o...@googlemail.com>
wrote:


Hmm, still doesn't work. Looks like the download of
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/mxnet/0.12.0.rc0
/apache-mxnet-src-0.12.0.rc0-incubating.tar.gz.sha512 has some problems
on my machine, I can't view the file contents, maybe a problem with the
content-type?


On 21.10.2017 07:01, Meghna Baijal wrote:


Hi Sebastian,
Can you try the following:
gsha512sum --check  ./apache-mxnet-src-0.12.0.rc0-
incubating.tar.gz.sha512
This worked for me.

Thanks,
Meghna Baijal

On Oct 20, 2017 9:53 PM, "Sebastian" <ssc.o...@googlemail.com> wrote:

Verifying the sha512 sig didn't work for me, what am I doing wrong here?

sha512sum -c apache-mxnet-src-0.12.0.rc0-incubating.tar.gz.sha512
sha512sum: apache-mxnet-src-0.12.0.rc0-incubating.tar.gz.sha512: no
properly formatted SHA512 checksum lines found


On 21.10.2017 02:36, Suneel Marthi wrote:

+1 binding


1. Checked Sigs and hashes
2. has -incubating in artifact name


On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Chris Olivier <cjolivie...@gmail.com>
wrote:

+1




On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 5:01 PM Meghna Baijal <
meghnabaijal2...@gmail.com



wrote:


This is the vote to release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 0.12.0.



Voting will start now (Friday, October 20, 2017 11:55PM UTC) and

close Tuesday, October 24, 2017 11:55PM UTC.


Link to release notes:


https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/

MXNet+0.12.0+Release+Notes





Link to release candidate 0.12.0.rc0:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/mxnet/0.12.0.rc0/


View this page and scroll down to “Build from Source” to build this
project:

http://mxnet.incubator.apache.org/get_started/install.html


The release tag can be found here:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/tree/0.12.0.rc
<https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/tree/0.12.0.rc0>0

(Note: The README.md points to the 0.12.0 tag and does not work at

the

moment.)


Please make sure you TEST before you vote accordingly:


+1 = approve


+0 = no opinion


-1 = disapprove (provide reason)


Thanks,

Meghna Baijal

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 0.12.0.rc0

[Sebastian]

Hmm, still doesn't work. Looks like the download of 
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/mxnet/0.12.0.rc0 
/apache-mxnet-src-0.12.0.rc0-incubating.tar.gz.sha512 has some problems 
on my machine, I can't view the file contents, maybe a problem with the 
content-type?


On 21.10.2017 07:01, Meghna Baijal wrote:

Hi Sebastian,
Can you try the following:
gsha512sum --check  ./apache-mxnet-src-0.12.0.rc0-incubating.tar.gz.sha512
This worked for me.

Thanks,
Meghna Baijal

On Oct 20, 2017 9:53 PM, "Sebastian" <ssc.o...@googlemail.com> wrote:

Verifying the sha512 sig didn't work for me, what am I doing wrong here?

sha512sum -c apache-mxnet-src-0.12.0.rc0-incubating.tar.gz.sha512
sha512sum: apache-mxnet-src-0.12.0.rc0-incubating.tar.gz.sha512: no
properly formatted SHA512 checksum lines found


On 21.10.2017 02:36, Suneel Marthi wrote:


+1 binding

1. Checked Sigs and hashes
2. has -incubating in artifact name


On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Chris Olivier <cjolivie...@gmail.com>
wrote:

+1



On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 5:01 PM Meghna Baijal <meghnabaijal2...@gmail.com



wrote:

This is the vote to release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 0.12.0.


Voting will start now (Friday, October 20, 2017 11:55PM UTC) and

close Tuesday, October 24, 2017 11:55PM UTC.


Link to release notes:


https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/


MXNet+0.12.0+Release+Notes




Link to release candidate 0.12.0.rc0:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/mxnet/0.12.0.rc0/


View this page and scroll down to “Build from Source” to build this
project:

http://mxnet.incubator.apache.org/get_started/install.html


The release tag can be found here:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/tree/0.12.0.rc
<https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/tree/0.12.0.rc0>0

(Note: The README.md points to the 0.12.0 tag and does not work at the
moment.)


Please make sure you TEST before you vote accordingly:


+1 = approve


+0 = no opinion


-1 = disapprove (provide reason)


Thanks,

Meghna Baijal

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 0.12.0.rc0

[Sebastian]

Verifying the sha512 sig didn't work for me, what am I doing wrong here?

sha512sum -c apache-mxnet-src-0.12.0.rc0-incubating.tar.gz.sha512
sha512sum: apache-mxnet-src-0.12.0.rc0-incubating.tar.gz.sha512: no 
properly formatted SHA512 checksum lines found


On 21.10.2017 02:36, Suneel Marthi wrote:

+1 binding

1. Checked Sigs and hashes
2. has -incubating in artifact name


On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Chris Olivier 
wrote:


+1


On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 5:01 PM Meghna Baijal 
wrote:


This is the vote to release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 0.12.0.

Voting will start now (Friday, October 20, 2017 11:55PM UTC) and

close Tuesday, October 24, 2017 11:55PM UTC.


Link to release notes:


https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/

MXNet+0.12.0+Release+Notes



Link to release candidate 0.12.0.rc0:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/mxnet/0.12.0.rc0/


View this page and scroll down to “Build from Source” to build this
project:

http://mxnet.incubator.apache.org/get_started/install.html


The release tag can be found here:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/tree/0.12.0.rc
0

(Note: The README.md points to the 0.12.0 tag and does not work at the
moment.)


Please make sure you TEST before you vote accordingly:


+1 = approve


+0 = no opinion


-1 = disapprove (provide reason)


Thanks,

Meghna Baijal

Re: Request for suggestions- Supporting onnx in mxnet

[Sebastian]

One solution: The MXNet community forks the DMLC code it relies on into the
MXNet codebase and moves on without being tied down by the decisions of a
non-compatible community.


+1 had a similar impression while following this discussion.

-s

Re: PROCESS: Contacting the Apache Infra team

[Sebastian]

I'm happy to help out with filing INFRA tickets for anyone working in a 
European time zone.


Best,
Sebastian

On 06.10.2017 07:13, Henri Yandell wrote:

Hi Apache MXNet Committers and Contributors,

As a community we've been sending a lot of requests (JIRA, HipChat etc) in
the direction of the Apache Infra team without discussing them first here.
As a community we are causing them a lot of work corralling topics that
would be better sorted out on our dev@ list first.

We also have contributors who are contacting the Infra team without being
representatives of the project (i.e. committers). Contributors - your
energy is very much appreciated, but there is no way for Infra to know who
you are.

Going forward, please raise _all_ Infra topics on the dev@ list for initial
discussion. Once its been discussed as a community, one of the 5 mentors
for the project will make the request on the Infra JIRA. If a contributor
is subsequently looking to assist Infra (and because mentors aren't
infinitely scalable), my expectation is for a mentor to then introduce that
contributor to Infra on their Hipchat if deeper conversation is needed.

Thank you,

Hen

Re: Formalize Committer Proposal and Application Procedure

[Sebastian]

Another thing might be that having too many committers makes it less valuable to
become a committer and therefore discourage new people.


In my experience, quite the opposite is true: Having many committers is 
beneficial for a project and makes life easier for everybody. There's 
more eyes to look at code contributions, more people answer questions 
and it also makes it easier for other committers to take time outs from 
the project (which might be necessary if they change jobs, have kids, etc)


I think the important thing to look at is not the number of committers, 
but the culture and processes in a project.


Best,
Sebastian

Why its a good idea to move to your own infrastructure

[Sebastian Schelter]

Hi,

This mail is a little bit off-topic, but I would like to share a story that
shows how important it is for open source projects to move to their own
infrastructure (like the one provided by the ASF) and not rely on the
goodwill of hosters like github:

https://blog.freeyourgadget.org/our-dmca-takedown-a-post-mortem.html

Best,
Sebastian

Re: Podling Report Reminder - July 2017

[Sebastian]

Also signed off!


On 06.07.2017 00:34, Markus Weimer wrote:

On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Suneel Marthi  wrote:

Thanks Dom, the report has been filed.

Mentors, please sign-off on the report.


Thanks and done!

Markus

Re: Granting access to Jenkins

[Sebastian]

I confirmed your subscription to the private@ list, so 3) shoudl already 
be done :)


Best,
Sebastian

On 27.06.2017 23:02, Ly Nguyen wrote:

Now that I'm a committer and have an account (thanks all!) I still need the
following to move migration forward:

1) Grant me access to Jenkins:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/Jenkins#Jenkins-HowdoIgetanaccount
2) Grant write access to mxnet test fork (need to make sure pushes, merges,
night tests run against it)
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-mxnet-test.git
3) Approve me on the private mailing list

@Henri will you support with those?

On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Henri Yandell <bay...@apache.org> wrote:


I don't see it; and I don't see it in the moderate queue.

On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 14:28 Naveen Swamy <mnnav...@gmail.com> wrote:


Henri,
  I sent a separate email to the private email address(
priv...@mxnet.incubator.apache.org). I checked with a couple of

committers

here and they have not got my email, I am wondering who are all on the
private@ list or is it not setup?

Thanks, Naveen

On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Ly Nguyen <nguyen...@gmail.com> wrote:


I've confirmed with a few folks in the Apache Infra team that I indeed

have

to be a committer to be granted access to Jenkins. I would need an

Apache

LDAP account, and the PMC chair would add me to the jobsadmin group as
detailed in the link above.

On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Henri Yandell <bay...@apache.org>

wrote:



Please send this to private@; the primary use of the private@

channel

is

to
discuss the people side of things; most typically adding new

committers.


Using the public side is unfair on Ly if there are negative votes,

and

unfair/pressurizing on any negative voter.

Hen


On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 8:59 AM, Naveen Swamy <mnnav...@gmail.com>

wrote:



Ly,
Continuous Integration is an integral part of MXNet's development

process,

you have been making great contributions in setting up Jenkins and

the

related tests for MXNet.
I propose that we promote Ly Nguyen(github id:lxn2) to be a

committer

and

make it easy for her to help in migrating Jenkins job to Apache

Infra.


thoughts ?

Henri,
Can you or someone from the PMC board help with this if there are

no

objections from others?

Thanks, Naveen


On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Ly Nguyen <nguyen...@gmail.com>

wrote:



Hi, I'm helping with the code migration of MXNet to Apache and

need

to

set

up jobs on Jenkins. It seems I would need to be a committer

(detailed

below) which I'm currently not. What would the group suggest for

me

in

this

case?

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/

Jenkins#Jenkins-

HowdoIgetanaccount

Typo in the documentation

[Sebastian Schelter]

Hi,

I think I found an typo in the documentation under
http://mxnet.io/architecture/note_engine.html, in the pseudo code for the
multiple GPU network:

 # aggregate gradient and update
fc1_wgrad[cpu]  = fc1_wgrad[gpu0] + fc1_wgrad[gpu1]
fc2_wgrad[cpu]  = fc2_wgrad[gpu0] + fc2_wgrad[gpu1]
fc1_weight[cpu] -= lr *  fc1_wgrad[gpu0]
fc2_weight[cpu] -= lr *  fc2_wgrad[gpu0]

I think the last two lines should refer to the weights on the 'cpu' instead
of weights on 'gpu0', and these wrong lines have also been copied to the
picture below the code.

Best,
Sebastian

Re: [Vote] New MXNet Logo

[Sebastian]

On 05.03.2017 16:23, Spisak, Joseph wrote:

Talking to me? Name is Joe.. :). Let's run for 3days and then close.


Oops, yes Joe not John, sorry for that :)


Sent from Joe's iPhone


On Mar 5, 2017, at 12:11 AM, Sebastian <s...@apache.org> wrote:

Dear John,

I would kindly ask you to specify how long this vote will be running, to adhere 
with best practices at Apache.

Best,
Sebastian


On 05.03.2017 06:07, Joseph Spisak wrote:

Let's vote on a new MXNet logo.  Thoughts on this one?

[ ] +1; Yep, love it!

[ ] -1; Hate it, because 

Re: Draft of March 2016 Podling Report

[Sebastian]

Signed. Thank you for drafting this, Suneel.

On 02.03.2017 07:13, Suneel Marthi wrote:

Thanks Henry. Done, other mentors please go ahead and sign the report.

On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 12:49 AM, Henri Yandell <bay...@apache.org> wrote:


Thanks Suneel :) Couple of bits inline.

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Suneel Marthi <smar...@apache.org> wrote:


Here's an initial draft of podling report for March 2016, please feel

free

to add/edit as you deem fit.

--

MXNet

A Flexible and Efficient Library for Deep Learning

MXNet has been incubating since 2017-01-23.

Three most important issues to address in the move towards graduation:

  1.Establish a formal release process and schedule, allowing for
dependable release cycles in line with Apache development process.

  2. Move the code and website to Apache Infra.

  3.



Perhaps:

PPMC to discuss adding in some community members who asked to join
while the Incubator vote was ongoing (learning how to vote new committers
in).  ?



Any issues that the Incubator PMC (IPMC) or ASF Board wish/need to be

aware of?

  None

How has the community developed since the last report?

  Project is still being established in Incubator

How has the project developed since the last report?

  This would be the first podling report



Second report :)




How would you assess the podling's maturity?

Please feel free to add your own commentary.

  [X] Initial setup

  [ ] Working towards first release

  [ ] Community building

  [ ] Nearing graduation

  [ ] Other:

Date of last release:

  No release yet

When were the last committers or PPMC members elected?

Project is being established with initial set of committers.

Signed-off-by:

  [ ](mxnet) Sebastian Schelter

 Comments:

  [ ](mxnet) Suneel Marthi

 Comments:

  [ ](mxnet) Markus Weimer

 Comments:

  [ ](mxnet) Henri Yandell

 Comments: