Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Michael Fladischer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
* Package name: python-django-modelcluster
Version : 4.4
Upstream Author : Matthew Westcott
* URL : https://github.com/wagtail/django-modelcluster/
* License
Hi Tzafrir,
On 2019-05-21 19:58, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> Is there a way to prove in some way (reproducible build or something
> similar) that the results were obtained from that set using the specific
> algorithm?
I wrote a dedicated section about reproducibility:
https://salsa.debian.org/lumin/de
Hi Paul,
On 2019-05-21 23:52, Paul Wise wrote:
> Are there any other case studies we could add?
Anybody is welcome to open an issue and add more
cases to the document. I can dig into them in the
future.
> Has anyone repeated the training of Mozilla DeepSpeech for example?
Generally speaking, tr
Hi Ben,
Good catch! I'm quite sure that the 3 categories are not overlapping
with each other. And I've fixed the language to make it logically
correct:
A **ToxicCandy Model** refers to an explicitly free software licensed
model, trained from unknown or non-free dataset.
A model is **Non-fr
On Tue, 2019-05-21 at 03:14 -0700, Mo Zhou wrote:
> They are added to the case study section.
Are there any other case studies we could add?
Has anyone repeated the training of Mozilla DeepSpeech for example?
Are deep learning models deterministically and reproducibly trainable?
If I re-train a
On Tue, 2019-05-21 at 00:11 -0700, Mo Zhou wrote:
[...]
> People do lazy execution on this problem. Now that a
> related package entered my packaging radar, and I think
> I'd better write a draft and shed some light on a safety
> area. Then here is the first humble attempt:
>
> https://salsa.deb
Hi,
On 21/05/2019 12:07, Andreas Tille wrote:
> If you ask me bothering buildd with this task is insane. However I'm
> positively convinced that we should ship the training data and be able
> to train the models from these.
>
Is there a way to prove in some way (reproducible build or something
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 05:46:11AM -0400, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2019, 03:41 Vincent Bernat wrote:.
> > Is there an example of a package where dh cannot be used? Making 96% of
> > packages simpler and 4% of packages moderately more complex seems to be
> > a good argument to uni
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ralf Treinen
* Package name: ocaml-cairo2
Version : 0.6.1
Upstream Author : Christophe Troestler
* URL : https://github.com/Chris00/ocaml-cairo
* License : LGPL3
Programming Lang: OCaml
Description : OCaml librar
Reinhard challenged me offlist to look at whether boxbackup would
actually be more maintainable with dh than with its current use of
debhelper.
Here are things I noticed that I wouldn't have to think about with dh.
The package may be correct, but if I were trying to maintain the package
I'd nee
Reinhard Tartler writes ("Re: Do we want to Require or Recommend DH"):
> I looked yesterday at the boxbackup source package and contemplated
> converting it to dh from debhelper. I decided to not, because I'm
> having a hard time seeing a significant simplification
> potential. Maybe I'm just not s
On Tue, 21 May 2019, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> In Debian we use version-revision (where revision is sometimes complex for
> backports and stable updates). If you use version-~revision where revision
> is
> some thing similar to, but different than that used for security updates,
> stable update
> "Reinhard" == Reinhard Tartler writes:
Reinhard>I looked yesterday at the boxbackup source package and
Reinhard> contemplated converting it to dh from debhelper. I decided
Reinhard> to not, because I'm having a hard time seeing a
Reinhard> significant simplification pote
Hi Paul,
They are added to the case study section. And I like
that question from ffmpeg-devel:
Where is the source for all those numbers?
On 2019-05-21 08:02, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 3:11 PM Mo Zhou wrote:
>
>> I'd better write a draft and shed some light on a safety
>> are
Hi Mo,
thanks again for all your effort for Deep Learning in Debian.
Please note, that I'm not competent in this field.
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 12:11:14AM -0700, Mo Zhou wrote:
>
> https://salsa.debian.org/lumin/deeplearning-policy
> (issue tracker is enabled)
Not sure whether this is sensi
On Tue, May 21, 2019, 03:41 Vincent Bernat wrote:.
>
> Is there an example of a package where dh cannot be used? Making 96% of
> packages simpler and 4% of packages moderately more complex seems to be
> a good argument to uniformize our packaging practices towards dh.
> --
> Use the fundamental c
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 09:40:38AM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 19 mai 2019 23:53 -04, Sam Hartman :
>
> > >> As promised, I'd like to start a discussion on whether we want to
> > >> recommend using the dh command from debhelper as our preferred
> > >> build system.
> >
> > Se
Quoting Vincent Bernat (2019-05-21 09:40:38)
> ❦ 19 mai 2019 23:53 -04, Sam Hartman :
>
> > >> As promised, I'd like to start a discussion on whether we
> > >> want to recommend using the dh command from debhelper as our
> > >> preferred build system.
> >
> > Sean> For those who haven't seen it
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 3:11 PM Mo Zhou wrote:
> I'd better write a draft and shed some light on a safety
> area. Then here is the first humble attempt:
>
> https://salsa.debian.org/lumin/deeplearning-policy
The policy looks good to me.
A couple of situations this related to this policy:
http
❦ 19 mai 2019 23:53 -04, Sam Hartman :
> >> As promised, I'd like to start a discussion on whether we want to
> >> recommend using the dh command from debhelper as our preferred
> >> build system.
>
> Sean> For those who haven't seen it, the original author of dh, Joey
> Sean>
Hi people,
A year ago I raised a topic on -devel, pointing out the
"deep learning v.s. software freedom" issue. We drew no
conclusion at that time, and linux distros who care about
software freedom may still have doubt on some fundamental
problems, e.g. "is this piece of deep learning software
rea
21 matches
Mail list logo
