s and more positive then
> > > negative as soon as the 72 hours hits.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 2:44 AM Justin Mclean
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > forgot to CC dev
> > > >
>
tin Mclean
> > wrote:
> >
> > > forgot to CC dev
> > >
> > > > Begin forwarded message:
> > > >
> > > > From: Justin Mclean
> > > > Subject: Re: [RESTARTING][VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating)
> > >
; > >
> > > From: Justin Mclean
> > > Subject: Re: [RESTARTING][VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating)
> > version 1.4.0.rc2
> > > Date: 13 February 2019 at 6:43:48 pm AEDT
> > > To: Michael Wall
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> &
as soon as the 72 hours hits.
Mike
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 2:44 AM Justin Mclean
wrote:
> forgot to CC dev
>
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > From: Justin Mclean
> > Subject: Re: [RESTARTING][VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating)
> version 1.4.0.rc2
>
forgot to CC dev
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Justin Mclean
> Subject: Re: [RESTARTING][VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version
> 1.4.0.rc2
> Date: 13 February 2019 at 6:43:48 pm AEDT
> To: Michael Wall
>
> Hi,
>
>> Option 1:
>> Do n
Thanks for the detailed explanation and the help on educating the community,
Michael.
People on the general list are spending time to help us get the licensing
right. If possible, I think we should be thankful by treating their feedbacks
more seriously, making the efforts to quickly fix the
Patric [mailto:patric.z...@intel.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2019 11:53 AM
> To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> Cc: Lv, Tao A ; Ye, Jason Y
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.0.rc2
>
> Hi Sheng,
>
> Thanks to raise this important issues. So
I think I misunderstood the 3rd party reference to imply Uber instead
of the 3rd party folder. I feel the same regardless, and defer to the
experts on what do do about the 3rd party folder.
As for the other license issues, we don't have to add license info to
readme or informational files. It is
Hi Qing,
I see 3 options
Option 1:
Do nothing. I don't know how a RESTARTED vote works. Steffen counted the
binding votes from the before it was restarted. Unsure if that actually
works. There has been one +1 votes since the restart, but it is
non-binding as best I can tell even though it
Hi Michael,
Could you please guide how to proceed with this? Given that we have a
possibility of announcing MXNet support in Horovod with their next release and
this would help MXNet increase our visibility.
Thanks,
Qing
On 2/12/19, 2:16 PM, "Michael Wall" wrote:
Team,
Here
Team,
Here is my read on the situation. The vote has been canceled. Justin's
point was that a -1 doesn't mean you must cancel a vote for the reasons he
outlined. But here the vote needs to be restarted and the issue Luciano
found needs to be addressed.
That issue is that there are files in
Hi -
Third party vendor considerations do not matter. Are you voting +1 with your
Apache hat on or your Amazon hat?
Regards,
Dave
> On Feb 11, 2019, at 10:16 PM, Lin Yuan wrote:
>
> +1 binding
> Horovod is going to release it's 0.16.0 in the coming week with MXNet
> integration. We need to
+1 binding
Horovod is going to release it's 0.16.0 in the coming week with MXNet
integration. We need to release 1.4.0 which includes all the dependencies
for Horovod integration.
Best,
Lin
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 9:30 PM Steffen Rochel
wrote:
> Dear community -
> based on Justin's and
Dear community -
based on Justin's and community feedback I'm suggesting to restart the vote.
Current status:
binding votes:
+1: 2 votes (Henri, Jason)
-1: 1 vote (Luciano)
non-binding:
+1: 1 vote (Kellen)
The community is investigating feedback from Luciano that the exclusion
file is to broad
I do believe in the benefit of MXNet community, MXNet 1.4 is a important
release with many useful features for our users:
1. Java Inference API, JVM memory management, Julia APIs
2. Multiple important directional experimental features - Subgraph API,
control flow operators, Topology aware
Hi All,
Can we move the VOTE forward since the RAT license should not be a problem that
block the release. We can always add that one in our future releases (e.g 1.4.1
or 1.5.0).
As you may aware, 1.4.0 release started very early this year and delayed a
couple of times until now. From the
Update on the issue 1. and 4.:
For 1., I fixed the notice year in master branch [1]. If we are to create a new
rc, the fix should be cherry-picked.
For 4., MKLDNN has found the issue [2] and posted the fix in their master
branch. I'm requesting that the fix be backported for the minor version
Dear community -
I'm cancelling the vote due to -1 feedback from Luciano due to RAT
failures.
For details see
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/51e9ab05edae2089c74a253000a92d5aa5c6406f54e5bd0a0b3c3879@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
The MXNet community will discuss next steps.
Regards,
Dear MXNet community -
the result of the vote to release Apache MXNet (incubating) version
1.4.0.rc2 are as follows:
Binding:
+1 three (Carin, Indhu, Haibin)
+0 one (Sheng)
-0 one (Anirudh)
-1 none
Non-binding:
+1 six (Yuxi, Aston, Kellen, Aaron, Tao, Lin)
0 none
-1 none
Voting thread:
> Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2019 10:33 AM
> To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.0.rc2
>
> Also, recent MKLDNN upgrade prevents us from offering binary distribution
> for earlier versions of OSX, as it now requires
] Do all source files have ASF headers? (sz: enforced by
> > license
> > > > > > > checker)
> > > > > > > -[Y] Do the contents of the release match with what's tagged in
> > > > version
> > > > > > > control?
> &g
sure. NOTICE year is wrong (it's 2019 now). TVM's NOTICE is
> > > missing
> > > > > > from MXNet's NOTICE file.
> > > > > > Could it possibly be fixed in the next release?
> > > > > > - Yes
> > > > > > I v
sure if it should be released. Could mentors advise if we
> > should
> > > > fix
> > > > > them before release?
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorReleaseChecklist
> > > > >
> >
t; > fix
> > > > them before release?
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorReleaseChecklist
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:56 PM Lv, Tao A
> wrote:
> > > >
> >
ed below items:
> > > >
> > > > 1. Checkout code from tag 1.4.0rc2 and build mkldnn backend
> > successfully
> > > > on both cpu and gpu w/ mkl and openblas
> > > > 2. ResNet50v1 FP32 performance looks good for both latency and
> > through
oughput
> > > 3. Quantization script works well with ResNet50v1
> > > 4. ResNet50v1 INT8 model accuracy looks good
> > > 5. ResNet50v1 INT8 model performance speedup looks good for both
> latency
> > > and throughput
> > >
> > >
> > >
--Original Message-----
> > From: kellen sunderland [mailto:kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Friday, February 1, 2019 11:45 AM
> > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.0.rc2
> >
> > Great,
50v1 INT8 model performance speedup looks good for both latency
> and throughput
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: kellen sunderland [mailto:kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 1, 2019 11:45 AM
> To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VO
Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.0.rc2
Great, thanks Steffen! I added a few key files but missed that one.
+1 from me.
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 9:35 AM Steffen Rochel
wrote:
> Kellen - Sergey, the 1.4.0 release co-manager signed the tar file.
> Please use his public key to va
Great, thanks Steffen! I added a few key files but missed that one.
+1 from me.
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 9:35 AM Steffen Rochel
wrote:
> Kellen - Sergey, the 1.4.0 release co-manager signed the tar file. Please
> use his public key to validate the asc.
> I was able to validate:
>
> curl
Kellen - Sergey, the 1.4.0 release co-manager signed the tar file. Please
use his public key to validate the asc.
I was able to validate:
curl https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/mxnet/KEYS -o KEYS
gpg --import KEYS
gpg --verify apache-mxnet-src-1.4.0.rc2-incubating.tar.gz.asc
+1 I built the full website including the branch and it was fine.
On Wed, Jan 30, 2019, 22:39 kellen sunderland +0
>
> Overall release looks good. Probably something I'm doing wrong, but so far
> not able to validate the .asc. I'm getting "Can't check signature: No
> public key". I've added
+0
Overall release looks good. Probably something I'm doing wrong, but so far
not able to validate the .asc. I'm getting "Can't check signature: No
public key". I've added the keys from GitHub and the release folder, and
also added your public key "40C9346904DFCE37" from the MIT key server
Dear MXNet community -
we currently have three +1 votes, one binding.
As the vote did not reach the necessary number of binding votes I'm
extending voting.
I'm calling on all PMC member, please test and vote.
Regards,
Steffen
On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 6:43 PM Aston Zhang wrote:
> +1
>
> Tested
+1
Tested with the Dive into Deep Learning book.
On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 1:25 PM Steffen Rochel
wrote:
> Thanks Carin and Yuxi.
>
> Committers and PMC members - please test and send your vote to release
> Apache MXNet (incubating) v1.4.0.
>
> Regards,
> Steffen
>
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at
+1
verified the training throughput for resnet50_v1 looks normal compared to
1.3.1 release
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 3:36 PM Carin Meier wrote:
> +1 - checked out from the release tag and built and tested Scala/Clojure
> package.
>
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 8:53 PM Steffen Rochel
> wrote:
>
> >
+1 - checked out from the release tag and built and tested Scala/Clojure
package.
On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 8:53 PM Steffen Rochel
wrote:
> Dear MXNet community,
>
> This is the vote to release Apache MXNet (incubating) version v1.4.0.
> Voting will
> start today, Saturday January 26th 6pm PST
Dear MXNet community,
This is the vote to release Apache MXNet (incubating) version v1.4.0.
Voting will
start today, Saturday January 26th 6pm PST and will close on Wednesday,
January 30th 7pm PST.
Link to release notes:
38 matches
Mail list logo
