Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.0.rc3

+1 Built from source. Verified distributed training of Resnet50 works fine. On Tue, Feb 19, 2019, 11:43 AM Sheng Zha -[Y] Are release files in correct location? > -[Y] Do release files have the word incubating in their name? > -[Y] Are the digital signature and hashes correct? > -[Y] Does

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.0.rc2

+1 Build from source and tested few examples from the examples folder. Thanks, Indu On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 6:21 PM Steffen Rochel wrote: > Hi Sheng - thanks for the feedback. > TVM notice file is missing as the 1.4.x branch/v1.4.0 release is using TVM > commit 0f053c8 > < >

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 1.3.0.RC0

+1 The release candidate looks good. I'm able to build and run basic models. One the FP16 issue: Like others have pointed out, releases on expensive in terms of time and effort. There needs to be a high and more objective bar on what qualifies as a release blocker to make sure we are not

Re: [VOTE] Subscribe dev@ to Github Activities

Some mentors/contributors/committees feel that the amount of discussions in dev list is too less given the amount of commits that happen and more discussions need to happen in the dev list to grow the community. In response some committees feel discussions actually happen in GitHub PRs. If the

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 1.2.1.RC1

+1 Built from source. Tested few RNN samples on GPU. Works fine. On Thu, Jul 12, 2018, 12:01 AM Haibin Lin wrote: > +1 > Built from source with cuda and dist kvstore. Ran dist_sync_kvstore.py > nightly test and it passed. > > Best, > Haibin > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 6:13 PM, Roshani Nagmote

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 1.2.1.RC0 (Patch Release)

+1 On Mon, Jun 18, 2018, 6:52 PM Anirudh wrote: > Hi, > > This is the vote to release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.2.1. Voting > will start now and close Thursday June 21st 7:00 PM PDT. > > Link to release candidate 1.2.1.rc0: > >

Re: Nightly tests README accurate?

ntOS within docker) and (upcoming) P3.8xlarge (Ubuntu, CentOS > within docker). > > What exact requirements do you have, Indhu? I'm happy to assist! > > -Marco > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 1:47 PM Indhu wrote: > > > Thanks Meghna. Do you know what hardware the nightly tests are c

Re: Nightly tests README accurate?

time to verify that the steps > > work correctly, and that the descriptions are accurate. > > > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 10:04 PM Indhu wrote: > > > > > Is the README > > > <https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/tree/master/tests/nightly> > > for >

Re: users@mxnet

I prefer the discuss forum over email for following reasons: 1. It is easier for newcomers. People can login using Facebook, Twitter or GitHub Id 2. The format is much more readable for people who search for something in a search engine and land on the page. 3. Markdown support makes it easier

Nightly tests README accurate?

Is the README for the nightly tests accurate? For example, 1. Are tests being run on machines with Intel i7-4790 and 4 Nvidia GTX 970 Tis? 2. Is http://ci.dmlc.ml/ the right place to look for build status? 3. Is the instruction

Re: [Launch Announcement] Keras 2 with Apache MXNet (incubating) backend

This is great. Thanks to everybody involved. On Tue, May 22, 2018, 9:15 AM sandeep krishnamurthy wrote: > Hello MXNet community, > > Keras users can now use the high-performance MXNet deep learning engine for > the distributed training of convolutional neural networks (CNNs)

Re: [QUICK VOTE] Release Apache MXNet(incubating) version 1.2.0.RC3

+1 given this is the same as previous RC with couple of markdowns removed. On Mon, May 14, 2018, 11:51 PM Anirudh wrote: > Hi all, > > As part of RC3 release, we have removed the docs ( > >

Re: MXNet 1.2 release question ?

Justin's -1 does not block the release if we can get one more +1. Do we have one more mentor or someone else who can +1 the release in general list? On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 1:01 PM, Anirudh wrote: > Hi all, > > I am going to proceed with option 1. Please let me know now,

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet(incubating) version 1.2.0.RC2

+1 I've been using CUDA build from this branch (built from source) on Ubuntu for couple of days now and I haven't seen any issue. The flaky tests need to be fixed but this release need not be blocked for that. On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Haibin Lin wrote: > I

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.2.0.RC0

+1 Compiled from source on P3 instance. Tested the SSD example and some Gluon examples. On Wed, Apr 18, 2018, 7:40 PM Anirudh wrote: > Hi everyone, > > This is a vote to release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.2.0. Voting > will start now (Wednesday, April 18th) and

Re: blog for MXNet

One option is to use a static website generator like Jekyll. Advantage is that blog posts can be written as markdown, and checked into GitHub. It is easy to collaborate. Access from China shouldn't be a problem too since we can host it on a domain of our choice. On Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 6:22 PM

PR build failed because of git errors

Hi, Looks like PR #10039 build failed because of git errors. Here is the error log: http://jenkins.mxnet-ci.amazon-ml.com/job/incubator-mxnet/job/PR-10039/4/console. Does someone know what could be happening here? Build error: Adding as 3rdparty/dlpack~7c28089749287f42ea8f41abd1358e6dbac54187

Re: [VOTE] tracking code changes with JIRA by associating pull requests

+1 to the proposal On Tue, Feb 27, 2018, 9:20 AM Nan Zhu wrote: > ideally, > > users report something fishy in github issue > > when confirmed that it is a bug or something to be improved, we should > create JIRAs > > On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Chris Olivier

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.1.0.RC0

+1 (binding) On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 2:16 PM Chris Olivier wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Haibin Lin > wrote: > > > Update: > > > > Link to release candidate 1.1.0.rc0: > >

Re: Commiter access to Jenkins Sevrer

Objective is to make sure committers has access to CI. As far as that objective is met, it shouldn't matter whether the auth mechanism uses GitHub or Apache SSO. If GitHub SSO is easier to implement, let's go ahead and do that unless someone in the list objects. On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 11:21 AM

Breaking change to the model JSON file in 1.0.0 release

After the 1.0.0 release, we heard from multiple users that the model JSON file produced by 1.0.0 when a model is saved is not compatible with older versions of MXNet. Since there was no such change documented in the release notes, our first thought was that it must be an unintentional change. We

Automatically translating Caffe code to MXNet

One of the questions we frequently encounter in forums and emails is “I have caffe code that does this. How do I do the same thing in MXNet”. While it might be possible to go through the documentation and do the translation layer by layer manually, we thought a tool that automatically does it will

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

+1 (binding) Built from source and tested with some example code. On Fri, Nov 24, 2017, 4:00 PM 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

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

+1 (binding) Built from source and ran some example code. 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,

Re: Disable 'required status check' for master

the checks for now to not block or slow down development until we have a faster CI system. On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 12:07 PM Indhu <indhubhara...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > We have been having issues getting CI to work fast enough. Currently the > CI is being the bottlen

Disable 'required status check' for master

Hi, We have been having issues getting CI to work fast enough. Currently the CI is being the bottleneck to get commits in. This is severely impacting development. I propose we disable 'required status check' for the master branch so that we can development is not impacted. We can work on fixing

Re: The Exchange Layer Support of MXNet

Do we have a consensus yet on how to implement this? On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 9:05 AM Tianqi Chen wrote: > As with every change, there need to be steps. The python API of gluon is a > first step toward moving API to the set of the new operator. I think > exchange and

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 0.12.0.rc0

+1 On Fri, Oct 20, 2017, 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

[Important] Please rebase your PRs

r code with master. Thanks, Indu On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 6:42 PM Indhu <indhubhara...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Some of you might have noticed that the CI builds were failing for reasons > other than your changes. There was a problem in the build process because > of which o

Cancelled builds

Hi, Some of you might have noticed that the CI builds were failing for reasons other than your changes. There was a problem in the build process because of which outputs from previous builds were not getting deleted and new builds were failing due to that. This issue has been rectified. Since the

Incremental builds

Hi, We all have the experience of making a small change in a PR and waiting for a couple of hours or more for the continuous integration builds to finish. This is because at the moment, all builds (even if it only fixes a typo in a comment) is built from scratch as a clean build. I was wondering

mx.symbol.CaffeLoss with more than two inputs

Following is smooth L1 Loss layer used in PVANet : layer { name: "rpn_loss_bbox" type: "SmoothL1Loss" bottom: "rpn_bbox_pred" bottom: "rpn_bbox_targets" bottom: "rpn_bbox_inside_weights" bottom: