Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
@Lin Sure! Let's work together to promote MXNet Gluon, GluonNLP and GluonCV. On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 6:44 PM Lin Yuan wrote: > @Junru I fully agree with what you said. What I meant is we need to make > more customers know about them. > > Lin > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 6:34 PM Junru Shao > wrote: > > > @Lin I believe that the way to build a healthy community is to make both > > customers and developers happy. In this case, I feel like the more > > important thing about toolkits is to explain how useful they are to our > > customers, rather than positions, components or anything else. > > > > As I mentioned above, the usefulness comes from two aspects (at least). > > > > 1) they provide state-of-the-art models and training techniques > > out-of-the-box. If our customers want inference only, we have model zoo; > If > > our customers want to train on their own dataset, we have awesome > training > > tricks enclosed. > > > > 2) it provides exemplary codebase for anyone who wants to use Gluon > > elegantly. It does help a lot for real-world development, compared with > > simplest examples like tutorial. > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 6:07 PM Junru Shao > > wrote: > > > > > Probably we should figure out how to explain MXNet Gluon to customers. > In > > > this case, I agree with @Mu that > > > > > > 1) MXNet Gluon provides high-level API like what Keras gives to > > TensorFlow. > > > > > > 2) MXNet Gluon supports hybridization, which unifies both symbolic and > > > imperative programming style. > > > > > > Also, about toolkits, we could mention > > > > > > 3) GluonNLP and GluonCV are two awesome libraries in their respective > > > domain, both of which are built on MXNet Gluon. They not only provide > an > > > awesome exemplary codebase for customers to learn the best way to use > > MXNet > > > Gluon, but also come with the state-of-the-art models and training > > > techniques out-of-the-box. > > > > > > Any other ideas? > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:54 PM Pedro Larroy < > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> +1 to MXNet Gluon given the feedbacks and explanations from everyone > so > > >> far. > > >> > > >> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:09 PM Junru Shao > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > I feel like MXNet Gluon is a good name. You don't lose customers who > > >> have > > >> > been familiar with MXNet, nor lose customers who are used to MXNet > > >> symbolic. > > >> > > > >> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:07 PM Davydenko, Denis < > > >> > dzianis.davydze...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > As subject suggests this is a proposal for re-branding of Gluon to > > >> align > > >> > > it with MXNet. One of the common things undertaken for re-branding > > >> > > exercises is renaming. That's what my thinking behind suggesting > new > > >> name > > >> > > for Gluon. I am sincerely curious what would be alternatives to > > >> rebrand > > >> > > Gluon to align it with MXNet without changing its name. > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > On 3/22/19, 4:57 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > Are you proposing to rename Gluon? I think Pedro's opinion is > > >> about a > > >> > > better way to communicate what's Gluon and how it's related to > > >> MXNet. > > >> > > > > >> > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:54 PM Davydenko, Denis > > >> > > > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > > I support idea of putting brands of MXNet and Gluon closer > > >> together. > > >> > > I > > >> > > > agree with your argument, Mu, but MXNet is quite far away > from > > >> TF > > >> > > place at > > >> > > > this time so I don’t know how well that argument is > > transferable > > >> > > from TF > > >> > > > position to MXNet position. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > MXNet Imperative is definitely too restrictive of a name, we > > can > > >> > > come up > > >> > > > with better one... MXNet-M for example, stands for > > >> MXNet-Modified > > >> > > (military > > >> > > > connotation). If naming is the only thing we need to figure > > out > > >> - > > >> > > that is a > > >> > > > good place to be in __ > > >> > > > > > >> > > > -- > > >> > > > Thanks, > > >> > > > Denis > > >> > > > > > >> > > > On 3/22/19, 4:48 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Gluon is about imperative neural network training and > data > > >> > > loading. > > >> > > > ndarray > > >> > > > is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also > > >> supports > > >> > > > symbolic > > >> > > > execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not > > be > > >> a > > >> > > good > > >> > > > name for > > >> > > > it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF > talks > > >> about > > >> > > Keras. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang < > > >> > > terrytangy...@gmail.com> > > >> > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > +1 > > >> > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
@Junru I fully agree with what you said. What I meant is we need to make more customers know about them. Lin On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 6:34 PM Junru Shao wrote: > @Lin I believe that the way to build a healthy community is to make both > customers and developers happy. In this case, I feel like the more > important thing about toolkits is to explain how useful they are to our > customers, rather than positions, components or anything else. > > As I mentioned above, the usefulness comes from two aspects (at least). > > 1) they provide state-of-the-art models and training techniques > out-of-the-box. If our customers want inference only, we have model zoo; If > our customers want to train on their own dataset, we have awesome training > tricks enclosed. > > 2) it provides exemplary codebase for anyone who wants to use Gluon > elegantly. It does help a lot for real-world development, compared with > simplest examples like tutorial. > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 6:07 PM Junru Shao > wrote: > > > Probably we should figure out how to explain MXNet Gluon to customers. In > > this case, I agree with @Mu that > > > > 1) MXNet Gluon provides high-level API like what Keras gives to > TensorFlow. > > > > 2) MXNet Gluon supports hybridization, which unifies both symbolic and > > imperative programming style. > > > > Also, about toolkits, we could mention > > > > 3) GluonNLP and GluonCV are two awesome libraries in their respective > > domain, both of which are built on MXNet Gluon. They not only provide an > > awesome exemplary codebase for customers to learn the best way to use > MXNet > > Gluon, but also come with the state-of-the-art models and training > > techniques out-of-the-box. > > > > Any other ideas? > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:54 PM Pedro Larroy < > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> +1 to MXNet Gluon given the feedbacks and explanations from everyone so > >> far. > >> > >> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:09 PM Junru Shao > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > I feel like MXNet Gluon is a good name. You don't lose customers who > >> have > >> > been familiar with MXNet, nor lose customers who are used to MXNet > >> symbolic. > >> > > >> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:07 PM Davydenko, Denis < > >> > dzianis.davydze...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> > > As subject suggests this is a proposal for re-branding of Gluon to > >> align > >> > > it with MXNet. One of the common things undertaken for re-branding > >> > > exercises is renaming. That's what my thinking behind suggesting new > >> name > >> > > for Gluon. I am sincerely curious what would be alternatives to > >> rebrand > >> > > Gluon to align it with MXNet without changing its name. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On 3/22/19, 4:57 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > >> > > > >> > > Are you proposing to rename Gluon? I think Pedro's opinion is > >> about a > >> > > better way to communicate what's Gluon and how it's related to > >> MXNet. > >> > > > >> > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:54 PM Davydenko, Denis > >> > > > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > I support idea of putting brands of MXNet and Gluon closer > >> together. > >> > > I > >> > > > agree with your argument, Mu, but MXNet is quite far away from > >> TF > >> > > place at > >> > > > this time so I don’t know how well that argument is > transferable > >> > > from TF > >> > > > position to MXNet position. > >> > > > > >> > > > MXNet Imperative is definitely too restrictive of a name, we > can > >> > > come up > >> > > > with better one... MXNet-M for example, stands for > >> MXNet-Modified > >> > > (military > >> > > > connotation). If naming is the only thing we need to figure > out > >> - > >> > > that is a > >> > > > good place to be in __ > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > Thanks, > >> > > > Denis > >> > > > > >> > > > On 3/22/19, 4:48 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > Gluon is about imperative neural network training and data > >> > > loading. > >> > > > ndarray > >> > > > is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also > >> supports > >> > > > symbolic > >> > > > execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not > be > >> a > >> > > good > >> > > > name for > >> > > > it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF talks > >> about > >> > > Keras. > >> > > > > >> > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang < > >> > > terrytangy...@gmail.com> > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > +1 > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan < > >> apefor...@gmail.com> > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > +1. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Just to give some of my real experience: > >> > > > > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many > >> responses are > >> > > > "This seems > >> > > > > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
@Foivos I strongly agree with you that MXNet Gluon deserves better advertisement. Our community should work together to make this happen. On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 6:29 PM Tianqi Chen wrote: > > Today there is a big initiative to publicize MXNet. > > > It would be great such initiative can be(and should be) brought to dev@.. > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 6:08 PM Junru Shao > > wrote: > > > > > Probably we should figure out how to explain MXNet Gluon to customers. > In > > > this case, I agree with @Mu that > > > > > > 1) MXNet Gluon provides high-level API like what Keras gives to > > TensorFlow. > > > > > > 2) MXNet Gluon supports hybridization, which unifies both symbolic and > > > imperative programming style. > > > > > > Also, about toolkits, we could mention > > > > > > 3) GluonNLP and GluonCV are two awesome libraries in their respective > > > domain, both of which are built on MXNet Gluon. They not only provide > an > > > awesome exemplary codebase for customers to learn the best way to use > > MXNet > > > Gluon, but also come with the state-of-the-art models and training > > > techniques out-of-the-box. > > > > > > Any other ideas? > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:54 PM Pedro Larroy < > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 to MXNet Gluon given the feedbacks and explanations from everyone > so > > > > far. > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:09 PM Junru Shao > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I feel like MXNet Gluon is a good name. You don't lose customers > who > > > have > > > > > been familiar with MXNet, nor lose customers who are used to MXNet > > > > symbolic. > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:07 PM Davydenko, Denis < > > > > > dzianis.davydze...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > As subject suggests this is a proposal for re-branding of Gluon > to > > > > align > > > > > > it with MXNet. One of the common things undertaken for > re-branding > > > > > > exercises is renaming. That's what my thinking behind suggesting > > new > > > > name > > > > > > for Gluon. I am sincerely curious what would be alternatives to > > > rebrand > > > > > > Gluon to align it with MXNet without changing its name. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/22/19, 4:57 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Are you proposing to rename Gluon? I think Pedro's opinion is > > > > about a > > > > > > better way to communicate what's Gluon and how it's related > to > > > > MXNet. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:54 PM Davydenko, Denis > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I support idea of putting brands of MXNet and Gluon closer > > > > together. > > > > > > I > > > > > > > agree with your argument, Mu, but MXNet is quite far away > > from > > > TF > > > > > > place at > > > > > > > this time so I don’t know how well that argument is > > > transferable > > > > > > from TF > > > > > > > position to MXNet position. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > MXNet Imperative is definitely too restrictive of a name, > we > > > can > > > > > > come up > > > > > > > with better one... MXNet-M for example, stands for > > > MXNet-Modified > > > > > > (military > > > > > > > connotation). If naming is the only thing we need to figure > > > out - > > > > > > that is a > > > > > > > good place to be in __ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > Denis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/22/19, 4:48 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gluon is about imperative neural network training and > > data > > > > > > loading. > > > > > > > ndarray > > > > > > > is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also > > > > supports > > > > > > > symbolic > > > > > > > execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might > not > > > be a > > > > > > good > > > > > > > name for > > > > > > > it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF > talks > > > > about > > > > > > Keras. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang < > > > > > > terrytangy...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan < > > > > apefor...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just to give some of my real experience: > > > > > > > > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many > > > > responses are > > > > > > > "This seems > > > > > > > > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" > > > > > > > > > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who > > showed > > > > > > interests > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > MXNet > > > > > > > > > but none of the engineers knew the relationship
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
@Lin I believe that the way to build a healthy community is to make both customers and developers happy. In this case, I feel like the more important thing about toolkits is to explain how useful they are to our customers, rather than positions, components or anything else. As I mentioned above, the usefulness comes from two aspects (at least). 1) they provide state-of-the-art models and training techniques out-of-the-box. If our customers want inference only, we have model zoo; If our customers want to train on their own dataset, we have awesome training tricks enclosed. 2) it provides exemplary codebase for anyone who wants to use Gluon elegantly. It does help a lot for real-world development, compared with simplest examples like tutorial. On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 6:07 PM Junru Shao wrote: > Probably we should figure out how to explain MXNet Gluon to customers. In > this case, I agree with @Mu that > > 1) MXNet Gluon provides high-level API like what Keras gives to TensorFlow. > > 2) MXNet Gluon supports hybridization, which unifies both symbolic and > imperative programming style. > > Also, about toolkits, we could mention > > 3) GluonNLP and GluonCV are two awesome libraries in their respective > domain, both of which are built on MXNet Gluon. They not only provide an > awesome exemplary codebase for customers to learn the best way to use MXNet > Gluon, but also come with the state-of-the-art models and training > techniques out-of-the-box. > > Any other ideas? > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:54 PM Pedro Larroy > wrote: > >> +1 to MXNet Gluon given the feedbacks and explanations from everyone so >> far. >> >> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:09 PM Junru Shao >> wrote: >> > >> > I feel like MXNet Gluon is a good name. You don't lose customers who >> have >> > been familiar with MXNet, nor lose customers who are used to MXNet >> symbolic. >> > >> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:07 PM Davydenko, Denis < >> > dzianis.davydze...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > As subject suggests this is a proposal for re-branding of Gluon to >> align >> > > it with MXNet. One of the common things undertaken for re-branding >> > > exercises is renaming. That's what my thinking behind suggesting new >> name >> > > for Gluon. I am sincerely curious what would be alternatives to >> rebrand >> > > Gluon to align it with MXNet without changing its name. >> > > >> > > >> > > On 3/22/19, 4:57 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: >> > > >> > > Are you proposing to rename Gluon? I think Pedro's opinion is >> about a >> > > better way to communicate what's Gluon and how it's related to >> MXNet. >> > > >> > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:54 PM Davydenko, Denis >> > > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > I support idea of putting brands of MXNet and Gluon closer >> together. >> > > I >> > > > agree with your argument, Mu, but MXNet is quite far away from >> TF >> > > place at >> > > > this time so I don’t know how well that argument is transferable >> > > from TF >> > > > position to MXNet position. >> > > > >> > > > MXNet Imperative is definitely too restrictive of a name, we can >> > > come up >> > > > with better one... MXNet-M for example, stands for >> MXNet-Modified >> > > (military >> > > > connotation). If naming is the only thing we need to figure out >> - >> > > that is a >> > > > good place to be in __ >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Thanks, >> > > > Denis >> > > > >> > > > On 3/22/19, 4:48 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: >> > > > >> > > > Gluon is about imperative neural network training and data >> > > loading. >> > > > ndarray >> > > > is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also >> supports >> > > > symbolic >> > > > execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not be >> a >> > > good >> > > > name for >> > > > it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF talks >> about >> > > Keras. >> > > > >> > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang < >> > > terrytangy...@gmail.com> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > +1 >> > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan < >> apefor...@gmail.com> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > +1. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Just to give some of my real experience: >> > > > > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many >> responses are >> > > > "This seems >> > > > > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" >> > > > > > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who showed >> > > interests >> > > > in >> > > > > MXNet >> > > > > > but none of the engineers knew the relationship between >> > > > GluonNLP/GluonCV >> > > > > > and MXNet >> > > > > > 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding >> examples, I >> > > > received >> > > > > > comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
> Today there is a big initiative to publicize MXNet. It would be great such initiative can be(and should be) brought to dev@.. > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 6:08 PM Junru Shao > wrote: > > > Probably we should figure out how to explain MXNet Gluon to customers. In > > this case, I agree with @Mu that > > > > 1) MXNet Gluon provides high-level API like what Keras gives to > TensorFlow. > > > > 2) MXNet Gluon supports hybridization, which unifies both symbolic and > > imperative programming style. > > > > Also, about toolkits, we could mention > > > > 3) GluonNLP and GluonCV are two awesome libraries in their respective > > domain, both of which are built on MXNet Gluon. They not only provide an > > awesome exemplary codebase for customers to learn the best way to use > MXNet > > Gluon, but also come with the state-of-the-art models and training > > techniques out-of-the-box. > > > > Any other ideas? > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:54 PM Pedro Larroy < > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > +1 to MXNet Gluon given the feedbacks and explanations from everyone so > > > far. > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:09 PM Junru Shao > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I feel like MXNet Gluon is a good name. You don't lose customers who > > have > > > > been familiar with MXNet, nor lose customers who are used to MXNet > > > symbolic. > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:07 PM Davydenko, Denis < > > > > dzianis.davydze...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > As subject suggests this is a proposal for re-branding of Gluon to > > > align > > > > > it with MXNet. One of the common things undertaken for re-branding > > > > > exercises is renaming. That's what my thinking behind suggesting > new > > > name > > > > > for Gluon. I am sincerely curious what would be alternatives to > > rebrand > > > > > Gluon to align it with MXNet without changing its name. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/22/19, 4:57 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Are you proposing to rename Gluon? I think Pedro's opinion is > > > about a > > > > > better way to communicate what's Gluon and how it's related to > > > MXNet. > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:54 PM Davydenko, Denis > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I support idea of putting brands of MXNet and Gluon closer > > > together. > > > > > I > > > > > > agree with your argument, Mu, but MXNet is quite far away > from > > TF > > > > > place at > > > > > > this time so I don’t know how well that argument is > > transferable > > > > > from TF > > > > > > position to MXNet position. > > > > > > > > > > > > MXNet Imperative is definitely too restrictive of a name, we > > can > > > > > come up > > > > > > with better one... MXNet-M for example, stands for > > MXNet-Modified > > > > > (military > > > > > > connotation). If naming is the only thing we need to figure > > out - > > > > > that is a > > > > > > good place to be in __ > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Denis > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/22/19, 4:48 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Gluon is about imperative neural network training and > data > > > > > loading. > > > > > > ndarray > > > > > > is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also > > > supports > > > > > > symbolic > > > > > > execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not > > be a > > > > > good > > > > > > name for > > > > > > it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF talks > > > about > > > > > Keras. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang < > > > > > terrytangy...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan < > > > apefor...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just to give some of my real experience: > > > > > > > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many > > > responses are > > > > > > "This seems > > > > > > > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" > > > > > > > > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who > showed > > > > > interests > > > > > > in > > > > > > > MXNet > > > > > > > > but none of the engineers knew the relationship > between > > > > > > GluonNLP/GluonCV > > > > > > > > and MXNet > > > > > > > > 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding > > > examples, I > > > > > > received > > > > > > > > comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in > > > > > addition to > > > > > > MXNet?" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Everyone is talking about PyTorch nowadays, but not > > > Caffe2 > > > > > anymore > > > > > > > although > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
@Junru GluonNLP and GluonCV are definitely awesome toolkits. I feel we should advertise more about these hidden treasures :) Today there is a big initiative to publicize MXNet. I feel we should also bring GluonNLP and GluonCV on the same boat and highlight their tight relations with MXNet. My two cents. Lin On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 6:08 PM Junru Shao wrote: > Probably we should figure out how to explain MXNet Gluon to customers. In > this case, I agree with @Mu that > > 1) MXNet Gluon provides high-level API like what Keras gives to TensorFlow. > > 2) MXNet Gluon supports hybridization, which unifies both symbolic and > imperative programming style. > > Also, about toolkits, we could mention > > 3) GluonNLP and GluonCV are two awesome libraries in their respective > domain, both of which are built on MXNet Gluon. They not only provide an > awesome exemplary codebase for customers to learn the best way to use MXNet > Gluon, but also come with the state-of-the-art models and training > techniques out-of-the-box. > > Any other ideas? > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:54 PM Pedro Larroy > > wrote: > > > +1 to MXNet Gluon given the feedbacks and explanations from everyone so > > far. > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:09 PM Junru Shao > > wrote: > > > > > > I feel like MXNet Gluon is a good name. You don't lose customers who > have > > > been familiar with MXNet, nor lose customers who are used to MXNet > > symbolic. > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:07 PM Davydenko, Denis < > > > dzianis.davydze...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > As subject suggests this is a proposal for re-branding of Gluon to > > align > > > > it with MXNet. One of the common things undertaken for re-branding > > > > exercises is renaming. That's what my thinking behind suggesting new > > name > > > > for Gluon. I am sincerely curious what would be alternatives to > rebrand > > > > Gluon to align it with MXNet without changing its name. > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/22/19, 4:57 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > > > > > > > Are you proposing to rename Gluon? I think Pedro's opinion is > > about a > > > > better way to communicate what's Gluon and how it's related to > > MXNet. > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:54 PM Davydenko, Denis > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I support idea of putting brands of MXNet and Gluon closer > > together. > > > > I > > > > > agree with your argument, Mu, but MXNet is quite far away from > TF > > > > place at > > > > > this time so I don’t know how well that argument is > transferable > > > > from TF > > > > > position to MXNet position. > > > > > > > > > > MXNet Imperative is definitely too restrictive of a name, we > can > > > > come up > > > > > with better one... MXNet-M for example, stands for > MXNet-Modified > > > > (military > > > > > connotation). If naming is the only thing we need to figure > out - > > > > that is a > > > > > good place to be in __ > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Denis > > > > > > > > > > On 3/22/19, 4:48 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Gluon is about imperative neural network training and data > > > > loading. > > > > > ndarray > > > > > is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also > > supports > > > > > symbolic > > > > > execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not > be a > > > > good > > > > > name for > > > > > it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF talks > > about > > > > Keras. > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang < > > > > terrytangy...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan < > > apefor...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just to give some of my real experience: > > > > > > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many > > responses are > > > > > "This seems > > > > > > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" > > > > > > > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who showed > > > > interests > > > > > in > > > > > > MXNet > > > > > > > but none of the engineers knew the relationship between > > > > > GluonNLP/GluonCV > > > > > > > and MXNet > > > > > > > 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding > > examples, I > > > > > received > > > > > > > comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in > > > > addition to > > > > > MXNet?" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Everyone is talking about PyTorch nowadays, but not > > Caffe2 > > > > anymore > > > > > > although > > > > > > > the latter is still serving as a backend component. > > Maybe we > > > > > should also > > > > > > > doubledown on one
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
Hi to all, from a users perspective: the major problem with mxnet/gluon is that mxnet is not advertised enough. But it is picking up. Until recently gluoncv and gluon-nlp weren't on the official repository, so it makes sense people not knowing them (after all, they are both very young). I think a key reason for the confusion between mxnet and gluon, gluon being a high level API for mxnet, is because in the official announcement from amazon ( https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/introducing-gluon-a-new-library-for-machine-learning-from-aws-and-microsoft/), it was mentioned that gluon will support other frameworks as well (e.g. CNTK), so it is not clear (officially) if it will remain only on mxnet (I find it hard to see it differently). In the DL world, the name mxnet is a synonym to performance. I think you want to keep that. All the best. mxnet is amazing work. Thank you for all your efforts. Foivos On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 9:06 AM Lin Yuan wrote: > @Junru Thanks for the clarification. Given that we already have courseware > and books with Gluon, it makes sense to brand “Mxnet Gluon” with Gluon > being the high level API of mxnet > > @Tianqi what’s the roadmap of GluonNLP/GluonCV? Are they positioned to be > high level API of MXnet or some plug-and-play components that could > potentially be put on top of other frameworks in the future? If the former, > should we always highlight Mxnet whenever we advertise GluonNLP? > > Thanks > > Lin > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:41 PM Tianqi Chen > wrote: > > > Change the name gluon will result in a significant problem of backward > > compatibility for many of the current users, and that would be a huge -1 > > for the current community. > > One possibility is to do that is to have a clear roadmap of 2.0(which > gives > > the message of non-backward compatible) and we can discuss which features > > consolidate, but perhaps that will require a bit more thoughts and > > coordinated effort. > > > > Tianqi > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:39 PM Junru Shao > > wrote: > > > > > @Tianqi For sure GluonCV and GluonNLP should go with the current name. > No > > > reason to change. > > > > > > @Lin If customers are interested, I guess we could say they are awesome > > > toolkits built on top of MXNet Gluon API, and perfect illustration to > > write > > > clever and powerful code on the top of it. > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
I am not involved in GluonCV/NLP so I cannot speak for the corresponding community. I think it is great that GluonCV/NLP as a package has brought quite a lot of users to MXNet, it is up to the respective community to make the decision of their branding. Tianqi On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 6:06 PM Lin Yuan wrote: > @Junru Thanks for the clarification. Given that we already have courseware > and books with Gluon, it makes sense to brand “Mxnet Gluon” with Gluon > being the high level API of mxnet > > @Tianqi what’s the roadmap of GluonNLP/GluonCV? Are they positioned to be > high level API of MXnet or some plug-and-play components that could > potentially be put on top of other frameworks in the future? If the former, > should we always highlight Mxnet whenever we advertise GluonNLP? > > Thanks > > Lin > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:41 PM Tianqi Chen > wrote: > > > Change the name gluon will result in a significant problem of backward > > compatibility for many of the current users, and that would be a huge -1 > > for the current community. > > One possibility is to do that is to have a clear roadmap of 2.0(which > gives > > the message of non-backward compatible) and we can discuss which features > > consolidate, but perhaps that will require a bit more thoughts and > > coordinated effort. > > > > Tianqi > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:39 PM Junru Shao > > wrote: > > > > > @Tianqi For sure GluonCV and GluonNLP should go with the current name. > No > > > reason to change. > > > > > > @Lin If customers are interested, I guess we could say they are awesome > > > toolkits built on top of MXNet Gluon API, and perfect illustration to > > write > > > clever and powerful code on the top of it. > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
Probably we should figure out how to explain MXNet Gluon to customers. In this case, I agree with @Mu that 1) MXNet Gluon provides high-level API like what Keras gives to TensorFlow. 2) MXNet Gluon supports hybridization, which unifies both symbolic and imperative programming style. Also, about toolkits, we could mention 3) GluonNLP and GluonCV are two awesome libraries in their respective domain, both of which are built on MXNet Gluon. They not only provide an awesome exemplary codebase for customers to learn the best way to use MXNet Gluon, but also come with the state-of-the-art models and training techniques out-of-the-box. Any other ideas? On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:54 PM Pedro Larroy wrote: > +1 to MXNet Gluon given the feedbacks and explanations from everyone so > far. > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:09 PM Junru Shao > wrote: > > > > I feel like MXNet Gluon is a good name. You don't lose customers who have > > been familiar with MXNet, nor lose customers who are used to MXNet > symbolic. > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:07 PM Davydenko, Denis < > > dzianis.davydze...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > As subject suggests this is a proposal for re-branding of Gluon to > align > > > it with MXNet. One of the common things undertaken for re-branding > > > exercises is renaming. That's what my thinking behind suggesting new > name > > > for Gluon. I am sincerely curious what would be alternatives to rebrand > > > Gluon to align it with MXNet without changing its name. > > > > > > > > > On 3/22/19, 4:57 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > > > > > Are you proposing to rename Gluon? I think Pedro's opinion is > about a > > > better way to communicate what's Gluon and how it's related to > MXNet. > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:54 PM Davydenko, Denis > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I support idea of putting brands of MXNet and Gluon closer > together. > > > I > > > > agree with your argument, Mu, but MXNet is quite far away from TF > > > place at > > > > this time so I don’t know how well that argument is transferable > > > from TF > > > > position to MXNet position. > > > > > > > > MXNet Imperative is definitely too restrictive of a name, we can > > > come up > > > > with better one... MXNet-M for example, stands for MXNet-Modified > > > (military > > > > connotation). If naming is the only thing we need to figure out - > > > that is a > > > > good place to be in __ > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Thanks, > > > > Denis > > > > > > > > On 3/22/19, 4:48 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > > > > > > > Gluon is about imperative neural network training and data > > > loading. > > > > ndarray > > > > is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also > supports > > > > symbolic > > > > execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not be a > > > good > > > > name for > > > > it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF talks > about > > > Keras. > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang < > > > terrytangy...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan < > apefor...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > +1. > > > > > > > > > > > > Just to give some of my real experience: > > > > > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many > responses are > > > > "This seems > > > > > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" > > > > > > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who showed > > > interests > > > > in > > > > > MXNet > > > > > > but none of the engineers knew the relationship between > > > > GluonNLP/GluonCV > > > > > > and MXNet > > > > > > 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding > examples, I > > > > received > > > > > > comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in > > > addition to > > > > MXNet?" > > > > > > > > > > > > Everyone is talking about PyTorch nowadays, but not > Caffe2 > > > anymore > > > > > although > > > > > > the latter is still serving as a backend component. > Maybe we > > > > should also > > > > > > doubledown on one brand? > > > > > > > > > > > > Lin > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Pedro Larroy < > > > > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi dev@ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We heard feedback from users that the Gluon name is > > > confusing. > > > > Some of > > > > > > > them don't even know it's MXNet and it's unclear the > > > > relationship with > > > > > > > MXNet > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Would it make sense to rebrand Gluon to
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
@Junru Thanks for the clarification. Given that we already have courseware and books with Gluon, it makes sense to brand “Mxnet Gluon” with Gluon being the high level API of mxnet @Tianqi what’s the roadmap of GluonNLP/GluonCV? Are they positioned to be high level API of MXnet or some plug-and-play components that could potentially be put on top of other frameworks in the future? If the former, should we always highlight Mxnet whenever we advertise GluonNLP? Thanks Lin On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:41 PM Tianqi Chen wrote: > Change the name gluon will result in a significant problem of backward > compatibility for many of the current users, and that would be a huge -1 > for the current community. > One possibility is to do that is to have a clear roadmap of 2.0(which gives > the message of non-backward compatible) and we can discuss which features > consolidate, but perhaps that will require a bit more thoughts and > coordinated effort. > > Tianqi > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:39 PM Junru Shao > wrote: > > > @Tianqi For sure GluonCV and GluonNLP should go with the current name. No > > reason to change. > > > > @Lin If customers are interested, I guess we could say they are awesome > > toolkits built on top of MXNet Gluon API, and perfect illustration to > write > > clever and powerful code on the top of it. > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
+1 to MXNet Gluon given the feedbacks and explanations from everyone so far. On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:09 PM Junru Shao wrote: > > I feel like MXNet Gluon is a good name. You don't lose customers who have > been familiar with MXNet, nor lose customers who are used to MXNet symbolic. > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:07 PM Davydenko, Denis < > dzianis.davydze...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > As subject suggests this is a proposal for re-branding of Gluon to align > > it with MXNet. One of the common things undertaken for re-branding > > exercises is renaming. That's what my thinking behind suggesting new name > > for Gluon. I am sincerely curious what would be alternatives to rebrand > > Gluon to align it with MXNet without changing its name. > > > > > > On 3/22/19, 4:57 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > > > Are you proposing to rename Gluon? I think Pedro's opinion is about a > > better way to communicate what's Gluon and how it's related to MXNet. > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:54 PM Davydenko, Denis > > > > wrote: > > > > > I support idea of putting brands of MXNet and Gluon closer together. > > I > > > agree with your argument, Mu, but MXNet is quite far away from TF > > place at > > > this time so I don’t know how well that argument is transferable > > from TF > > > position to MXNet position. > > > > > > MXNet Imperative is definitely too restrictive of a name, we can > > come up > > > with better one... MXNet-M for example, stands for MXNet-Modified > > (military > > > connotation). If naming is the only thing we need to figure out - > > that is a > > > good place to be in __ > > > > > > -- > > > Thanks, > > > Denis > > > > > > On 3/22/19, 4:48 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > > > > > Gluon is about imperative neural network training and data > > loading. > > > ndarray > > > is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also supports > > > symbolic > > > execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not be a > > good > > > name for > > > it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF talks about > > Keras. > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang < > > terrytangy...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1. > > > > > > > > > > Just to give some of my real experience: > > > > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many responses are > > > "This seems > > > > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" > > > > > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who showed > > interests > > > in > > > > MXNet > > > > > but none of the engineers knew the relationship between > > > GluonNLP/GluonCV > > > > > and MXNet > > > > > 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding examples, I > > > received > > > > > comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in > > addition to > > > MXNet?" > > > > > > > > > > Everyone is talking about PyTorch nowadays, but not Caffe2 > > anymore > > > > although > > > > > the latter is still serving as a backend component. Maybe we > > > should also > > > > > doubledown on one brand? > > > > > > > > > > Lin > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Pedro Larroy < > > > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi dev@ > > > > > > > > > > > > We heard feedback from users that the Gluon name is > > confusing. > > > Some of > > > > > > them don't even know it's MXNet and it's unclear the > > > relationship with > > > > > > MXNet > > > > > > > > > > > > Would it make sense to rebrand Gluon to just MXNet or MXNet > > > > > > imperative? Diluting brands and names is never a good idea. > > > > > > > > > > > > There's also gluonhq which is related to JavaFX which adds > > to the > > > > > > confusion, search engine friendliness is not high as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
I have also faced this problem, when talking to someone external( at meetups etc.. ) using two names like gluon and mxnet gets confusing and people usually have not heard of gluon. I get around it by referring to gluon as "gluon-mxnet" while talking to anyone outside the community. - Anirudh On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Pedro Larroy wrote: > Hi dev@ > > We heard feedback from users that the Gluon name is confusing. Some of > them don't even know it's MXNet and it's unclear the relationship with > MXNet > > Would it make sense to rebrand Gluon to just MXNet or MXNet > imperative? Diluting brands and names is never a good idea. > > There's also gluonhq which is related to JavaFX which adds to the > confusion, search engine friendliness is not high as well. > > Pedro. >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
Change the name gluon will result in a significant problem of backward compatibility for many of the current users, and that would be a huge -1 for the current community. One possibility is to do that is to have a clear roadmap of 2.0(which gives the message of non-backward compatible) and we can discuss which features consolidate, but perhaps that will require a bit more thoughts and coordinated effort. Tianqi On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:39 PM Junru Shao wrote: > @Tianqi For sure GluonCV and GluonNLP should go with the current name. No > reason to change. > > @Lin If customers are interested, I guess we could say they are awesome > toolkits built on top of MXNet Gluon API, and perfect illustration to write > clever and powerful code on the top of it. >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
@Tianqi For sure GluonCV and GluonNLP should go with the current name. No reason to change. @Lin If customers are interested, I guess we could say they are awesome toolkits built on top of MXNet Gluon API, and perfect illustration to write clever and powerful code on the top of it.
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
BTW it would be great if some of the specific user feedback can be found in public archive, as per Apache principle, so things can be directly referred to. It would be great to get some of the customers mentioned in the post onto the public medium such as the to discuss forum or user list as well. On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:18 PM Junru Shao wrote: > dev list seems to be reordering my post...To clarify, I am opposed to > renaming or making it disappear because of potential distraction, but > suggest using MXNet Gluon instead of Gluon, which looks more aligned. > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:08 PM Junru Shao > wrote: > > > I feel like MXNet Gluon is a good name. You don't lose customers who have > > been familiar with MXNet, nor lose customers who are used to MXNet > symbolic. > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:07 PM Davydenko, Denis < > > dzianis.davydze...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> As subject suggests this is a proposal for re-branding of Gluon to align > >> it with MXNet. One of the common things undertaken for re-branding > >> exercises is renaming. That's what my thinking behind suggesting new > name > >> for Gluon. I am sincerely curious what would be alternatives to rebrand > >> Gluon to align it with MXNet without changing its name. > >> > >> > >> On 3/22/19, 4:57 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > >> > >> Are you proposing to rename Gluon? I think Pedro's opinion is about > a > >> better way to communicate what's Gluon and how it's related to > MXNet. > >> > >> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:54 PM Davydenko, Denis > >> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > I support idea of putting brands of MXNet and Gluon closer > >> together. I > >> > agree with your argument, Mu, but MXNet is quite far away from TF > >> place at > >> > this time so I don’t know how well that argument is transferable > >> from TF > >> > position to MXNet position. > >> > > >> > MXNet Imperative is definitely too restrictive of a name, we can > >> come up > >> > with better one... MXNet-M for example, stands for MXNet-Modified > >> (military > >> > connotation). If naming is the only thing we need to figure out - > >> that is a > >> > good place to be in __ > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Thanks, > >> > Denis > >> > > >> > On 3/22/19, 4:48 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > >> > > >> > Gluon is about imperative neural network training and data > >> loading. > >> > ndarray > >> > is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also > supports > >> > symbolic > >> > execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not be a > >> good > >> > name for > >> > it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF talks > about > >> Keras. > >> > > >> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang < > >> terrytangy...@gmail.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > +1 > >> > > > >> > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan < > apefor...@gmail.com > >> > > >> > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > +1. > >> > > > > >> > > > Just to give some of my real experience: > >> > > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many responses > >> are > >> > "This seems > >> > > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" > >> > > > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who showed > >> interests > >> > in > >> > > MXNet > >> > > > but none of the engineers knew the relationship between > >> > GluonNLP/GluonCV > >> > > > and MXNet > >> > > > 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding examples, > I > >> > received > >> > > > comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in > >> addition to > >> > MXNet?" > >> > > > > >> > > > Everyone is talking about PyTorch nowadays, but not Caffe2 > >> anymore > >> > > although > >> > > > the latter is still serving as a backend component. Maybe > we > >> > should also > >> > > > doubledown on one brand? > >> > > > > >> > > > Lin > >> > > > > >> > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Pedro Larroy < > >> > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > >> > > > > > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > Hi dev@ > >> > > > > > >> > > > > We heard feedback from users that the Gluon name is > >> confusing. > >> > Some of > >> > > > > them don't even know it's MXNet and it's unclear the > >> > relationship with > >> > > > > MXNet > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Would it make sense to rebrand Gluon to just MXNet or > >> MXNet > >> > > > > imperative? Diluting brands and names is never a good > >> idea. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > There's also gluonhq which is related to JavaFX which > >> adds to the > >> > > > > confusion, search engine friendliness is not high as > well. > >> > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
dev list seems to be reordering my post...To clarify, I am opposed to renaming or making it disappear because of potential distraction, but suggest using MXNet Gluon instead of Gluon, which looks more aligned. On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:08 PM Junru Shao wrote: > I feel like MXNet Gluon is a good name. You don't lose customers who have > been familiar with MXNet, nor lose customers who are used to MXNet symbolic. > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:07 PM Davydenko, Denis < > dzianis.davydze...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> As subject suggests this is a proposal for re-branding of Gluon to align >> it with MXNet. One of the common things undertaken for re-branding >> exercises is renaming. That's what my thinking behind suggesting new name >> for Gluon. I am sincerely curious what would be alternatives to rebrand >> Gluon to align it with MXNet without changing its name. >> >> >> On 3/22/19, 4:57 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: >> >> Are you proposing to rename Gluon? I think Pedro's opinion is about a >> better way to communicate what's Gluon and how it's related to MXNet. >> >> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:54 PM Davydenko, Denis >> >> wrote: >> >> > I support idea of putting brands of MXNet and Gluon closer >> together. I >> > agree with your argument, Mu, but MXNet is quite far away from TF >> place at >> > this time so I don’t know how well that argument is transferable >> from TF >> > position to MXNet position. >> > >> > MXNet Imperative is definitely too restrictive of a name, we can >> come up >> > with better one... MXNet-M for example, stands for MXNet-Modified >> (military >> > connotation). If naming is the only thing we need to figure out - >> that is a >> > good place to be in __ >> > >> > -- >> > Thanks, >> > Denis >> > >> > On 3/22/19, 4:48 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: >> > >> > Gluon is about imperative neural network training and data >> loading. >> > ndarray >> > is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also supports >> > symbolic >> > execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not be a >> good >> > name for >> > it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF talks about >> Keras. >> > >> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang < >> terrytangy...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > +1 >> > > >> > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan > > >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > > +1. >> > > > >> > > > Just to give some of my real experience: >> > > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many responses >> are >> > "This seems >> > > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" >> > > > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who showed >> interests >> > in >> > > MXNet >> > > > but none of the engineers knew the relationship between >> > GluonNLP/GluonCV >> > > > and MXNet >> > > > 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding examples, I >> > received >> > > > comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in >> addition to >> > MXNet?" >> > > > >> > > > Everyone is talking about PyTorch nowadays, but not Caffe2 >> anymore >> > > although >> > > > the latter is still serving as a backend component. Maybe we >> > should also >> > > > doubledown on one brand? >> > > > >> > > > Lin >> > > > >> > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Pedro Larroy < >> > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com >> > > > > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > Hi dev@ >> > > > > >> > > > > We heard feedback from users that the Gluon name is >> confusing. >> > Some of >> > > > > them don't even know it's MXNet and it's unclear the >> > relationship with >> > > > > MXNet >> > > > > >> > > > > Would it make sense to rebrand Gluon to just MXNet or >> MXNet >> > > > > imperative? Diluting brands and names is never a good >> idea. >> > > > > >> > > > > There's also gluonhq which is related to JavaFX which >> adds to the >> > > > > confusion, search engine friendliness is not high as well. >> > > > > >> > > > > Pedro. >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >>
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
I think GluonCV and GluonNLP are useful domain specific libraries that build on top of MXNet. And it is perfectly fine to go with the current established names. Tianqi On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:57 PM Mu Li wrote: > Are you proposing to rename Gluon? I think Pedro's opinion is about a > better way to communicate what's Gluon and how it's related to MXNet. > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:54 PM Davydenko, Denis > wrote: > > > I support idea of putting brands of MXNet and Gluon closer together. I > > agree with your argument, Mu, but MXNet is quite far away from TF place > at > > this time so I don’t know how well that argument is transferable from TF > > position to MXNet position. > > > > MXNet Imperative is definitely too restrictive of a name, we can come up > > with better one... MXNet-M for example, stands for MXNet-Modified > (military > > connotation). If naming is the only thing we need to figure out - that > is a > > good place to be in __ > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > Denis > > > > On 3/22/19, 4:48 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > > > Gluon is about imperative neural network training and data loading. > > ndarray > > is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also supports > > symbolic > > execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not be a good > > name for > > it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF talks about > Keras. > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang > > wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan > > wrote: > > > > > > > +1. > > > > > > > > Just to give some of my real experience: > > > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many responses are > > "This seems > > > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" > > > > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who showed interests > > in > > > MXNet > > > > but none of the engineers knew the relationship between > > GluonNLP/GluonCV > > > > and MXNet > > > > 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding examples, I > > received > > > > comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in addition to > > MXNet?" > > > > > > > > Everyone is talking about PyTorch nowadays, but not Caffe2 > anymore > > > although > > > > the latter is still serving as a backend component. Maybe we > > should also > > > > doubledown on one brand? > > > > > > > > Lin > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Pedro Larroy < > > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi dev@ > > > > > > > > > > We heard feedback from users that the Gluon name is confusing. > > Some of > > > > > them don't even know it's MXNet and it's unclear the > > relationship with > > > > > MXNet > > > > > > > > > > Would it make sense to rebrand Gluon to just MXNet or MXNet > > > > > imperative? Diluting brands and names is never a good idea. > > > > > > > > > > There's also gluonhq which is related to JavaFX which adds to > the > > > > > confusion, search engine friendliness is not high as well. > > > > > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
-1 for now. Respectfully I have some concerns. First, Gluon is about a new programming paradigm, neither symbolic programming nor imperative, but both. It brings concrete benefit for both prototyping and deployment. To help customers best enjoy the benefit of Gluon, we need more advertisement, more clarification, rather than trying to prevent customers from knowing the fact such great thing exists. Second, every time you rebrand, you confuse customers. To rebrand is not to attract, but to continue confuse more customers. Suppose the name Gluon disappears, how do you guys differentiate it between the less flexible MXNet symbolic, and between the less deployment-friendly MXNet imperative? Last but not least, the name Gluon, which has been well respected and cited by many peers who do DL framework research, as the simple and effective way to unify the two paradigms. There is no reason to destroy our brand. I really would love to mention, if we really want a framework to be great, we need more advertisement of how Gluon addresses customers pain point, rather than making it disappear. On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:48 PM Mu Li wrote: > Gluon is about imperative neural network training and data loading. ndarray > is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also supports symbolic > execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not be a good name for > it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF talks about Keras. > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang wrote: > > > +1 > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan wrote: > > > > > +1. > > > > > > Just to give some of my real experience: > > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many responses are "This > seems > > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" > > > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who showed interests in > > MXNet > > > but none of the engineers knew the relationship between > GluonNLP/GluonCV > > > and MXNet > > > 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding examples, I received > > > comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in addition to > MXNet?" > > > > > > Everyone is talking about PyTorch nowadays, but not Caffe2 anymore > > although > > > the latter is still serving as a backend component. Maybe we should > also > > > doubledown on one brand? > > > > > > Lin > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Pedro Larroy < > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi dev@ > > > > > > > > We heard feedback from users that the Gluon name is confusing. Some > of > > > > them don't even know it's MXNet and it's unclear the relationship > with > > > > MXNet > > > > > > > > Would it make sense to rebrand Gluon to just MXNet or MXNet > > > > imperative? Diluting brands and names is never a good idea. > > > > > > > > There's also gluonhq which is related to JavaFX which adds to the > > > > confusion, search engine friendliness is not high as well. > > > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
This sounds pretty good from my perspective, I would +1 such suggestion! On 3/22/19, 5:09 PM, "Junru Shao" wrote: I feel like MXNet Gluon is a good name. You don't lose customers who have been familiar with MXNet, nor lose customers who are used to MXNet symbolic. On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:07 PM Davydenko, Denis < dzianis.davydze...@gmail.com> wrote: > As subject suggests this is a proposal for re-branding of Gluon to align > it with MXNet. One of the common things undertaken for re-branding > exercises is renaming. That's what my thinking behind suggesting new name > for Gluon. I am sincerely curious what would be alternatives to rebrand > Gluon to align it with MXNet without changing its name. > > > On 3/22/19, 4:57 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > Are you proposing to rename Gluon? I think Pedro's opinion is about a > better way to communicate what's Gluon and how it's related to MXNet. > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:54 PM Davydenko, Denis > > wrote: > > > I support idea of putting brands of MXNet and Gluon closer together. > I > > agree with your argument, Mu, but MXNet is quite far away from TF > place at > > this time so I don’t know how well that argument is transferable > from TF > > position to MXNet position. > > > > MXNet Imperative is definitely too restrictive of a name, we can > come up > > with better one... MXNet-M for example, stands for MXNet-Modified > (military > > connotation). If naming is the only thing we need to figure out - > that is a > > good place to be in __ > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > Denis > > > > On 3/22/19, 4:48 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > > > Gluon is about imperative neural network training and data > loading. > > ndarray > > is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also supports > > symbolic > > execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not be a > good > > name for > > it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF talks about > Keras. > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang < > terrytangy...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan > > wrote: > > > > > > > +1. > > > > > > > > Just to give some of my real experience: > > > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many responses are > > "This seems > > > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" > > > > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who showed > interests > > in > > > MXNet > > > > but none of the engineers knew the relationship between > > GluonNLP/GluonCV > > > > and MXNet > > > > 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding examples, I > > received > > > > comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in > addition to > > MXNet?" > > > > > > > > Everyone is talking about PyTorch nowadays, but not Caffe2 > anymore > > > although > > > > the latter is still serving as a backend component. Maybe we > > should also > > > > doubledown on one brand? > > > > > > > > Lin > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Pedro Larroy < > > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi dev@ > > > > > > > > > > We heard feedback from users that the Gluon name is > confusing. > > Some of > > > > > them don't even know it's MXNet and it's unclear the > > relationship with > > > > > MXNet > > > > > > > > > > Would it make sense to rebrand Gluon to just MXNet or MXNet > > > > > imperative? Diluting brands and names is never a good idea. > > > > > > > > > > There's also gluonhq which is related to JavaFX which adds > to the > > > > > confusion, search engine friendliness is not high as well. > > > > > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
I feel like MXNet Gluon is a good name. You don't lose customers who have been familiar with MXNet, nor lose customers who are used to MXNet symbolic. On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 5:07 PM Davydenko, Denis < dzianis.davydze...@gmail.com> wrote: > As subject suggests this is a proposal for re-branding of Gluon to align > it with MXNet. One of the common things undertaken for re-branding > exercises is renaming. That's what my thinking behind suggesting new name > for Gluon. I am sincerely curious what would be alternatives to rebrand > Gluon to align it with MXNet without changing its name. > > > On 3/22/19, 4:57 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > Are you proposing to rename Gluon? I think Pedro's opinion is about a > better way to communicate what's Gluon and how it's related to MXNet. > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:54 PM Davydenko, Denis > > wrote: > > > I support idea of putting brands of MXNet and Gluon closer together. > I > > agree with your argument, Mu, but MXNet is quite far away from TF > place at > > this time so I don’t know how well that argument is transferable > from TF > > position to MXNet position. > > > > MXNet Imperative is definitely too restrictive of a name, we can > come up > > with better one... MXNet-M for example, stands for MXNet-Modified > (military > > connotation). If naming is the only thing we need to figure out - > that is a > > good place to be in __ > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > Denis > > > > On 3/22/19, 4:48 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > > > Gluon is about imperative neural network training and data > loading. > > ndarray > > is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also supports > > symbolic > > execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not be a > good > > name for > > it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF talks about > Keras. > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang < > terrytangy...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan > > wrote: > > > > > > > +1. > > > > > > > > Just to give some of my real experience: > > > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many responses are > > "This seems > > > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" > > > > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who showed > interests > > in > > > MXNet > > > > but none of the engineers knew the relationship between > > GluonNLP/GluonCV > > > > and MXNet > > > > 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding examples, I > > received > > > > comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in > addition to > > MXNet?" > > > > > > > > Everyone is talking about PyTorch nowadays, but not Caffe2 > anymore > > > although > > > > the latter is still serving as a backend component. Maybe we > > should also > > > > doubledown on one brand? > > > > > > > > Lin > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Pedro Larroy < > > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi dev@ > > > > > > > > > > We heard feedback from users that the Gluon name is > confusing. > > Some of > > > > > them don't even know it's MXNet and it's unclear the > > relationship with > > > > > MXNet > > > > > > > > > > Would it make sense to rebrand Gluon to just MXNet or MXNet > > > > > imperative? Diluting brands and names is never a good idea. > > > > > > > > > > There's also gluonhq which is related to JavaFX which adds > to the > > > > > confusion, search engine friendliness is not high as well. > > > > > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
As subject suggests this is a proposal for re-branding of Gluon to align it with MXNet. One of the common things undertaken for re-branding exercises is renaming. That's what my thinking behind suggesting new name for Gluon. I am sincerely curious what would be alternatives to rebrand Gluon to align it with MXNet without changing its name. On 3/22/19, 4:57 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: Are you proposing to rename Gluon? I think Pedro's opinion is about a better way to communicate what's Gluon and how it's related to MXNet. On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:54 PM Davydenko, Denis wrote: > I support idea of putting brands of MXNet and Gluon closer together. I > agree with your argument, Mu, but MXNet is quite far away from TF place at > this time so I don’t know how well that argument is transferable from TF > position to MXNet position. > > MXNet Imperative is definitely too restrictive of a name, we can come up > with better one... MXNet-M for example, stands for MXNet-Modified (military > connotation). If naming is the only thing we need to figure out - that is a > good place to be in __ > > -- > Thanks, > Denis > > On 3/22/19, 4:48 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > Gluon is about imperative neural network training and data loading. > ndarray > is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also supports > symbolic > execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not be a good > name for > it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF talks about Keras. > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang > wrote: > > > +1 > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan > wrote: > > > > > +1. > > > > > > Just to give some of my real experience: > > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many responses are > "This seems > > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" > > > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who showed interests > in > > MXNet > > > but none of the engineers knew the relationship between > GluonNLP/GluonCV > > > and MXNet > > > 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding examples, I > received > > > comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in addition to > MXNet?" > > > > > > Everyone is talking about PyTorch nowadays, but not Caffe2 anymore > > although > > > the latter is still serving as a backend component. Maybe we > should also > > > doubledown on one brand? > > > > > > Lin > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Pedro Larroy < > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi dev@ > > > > > > > > We heard feedback from users that the Gluon name is confusing. > Some of > > > > them don't even know it's MXNet and it's unclear the > relationship with > > > > MXNet > > > > > > > > Would it make sense to rebrand Gluon to just MXNet or MXNet > > > > imperative? Diluting brands and names is never a good idea. > > > > > > > > There's also gluonhq which is related to JavaFX which adds to the > > > > confusion, search engine friendliness is not high as well. > > > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
Are you proposing to rename Gluon? I think Pedro's opinion is about a better way to communicate what's Gluon and how it's related to MXNet. On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:54 PM Davydenko, Denis wrote: > I support idea of putting brands of MXNet and Gluon closer together. I > agree with your argument, Mu, but MXNet is quite far away from TF place at > this time so I don’t know how well that argument is transferable from TF > position to MXNet position. > > MXNet Imperative is definitely too restrictive of a name, we can come up > with better one... MXNet-M for example, stands for MXNet-Modified (military > connotation). If naming is the only thing we need to figure out - that is a > good place to be in __ > > -- > Thanks, > Denis > > On 3/22/19, 4:48 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: > > Gluon is about imperative neural network training and data loading. > ndarray > is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also supports > symbolic > execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not be a good > name for > it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF talks about Keras. > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang > wrote: > > > +1 > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan > wrote: > > > > > +1. > > > > > > Just to give some of my real experience: > > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many responses are > "This seems > > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" > > > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who showed interests > in > > MXNet > > > but none of the engineers knew the relationship between > GluonNLP/GluonCV > > > and MXNet > > > 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding examples, I > received > > > comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in addition to > MXNet?" > > > > > > Everyone is talking about PyTorch nowadays, but not Caffe2 anymore > > although > > > the latter is still serving as a backend component. Maybe we > should also > > > doubledown on one brand? > > > > > > Lin > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Pedro Larroy < > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi dev@ > > > > > > > > We heard feedback from users that the Gluon name is confusing. > Some of > > > > them don't even know it's MXNet and it's unclear the > relationship with > > > > MXNet > > > > > > > > Would it make sense to rebrand Gluon to just MXNet or MXNet > > > > imperative? Diluting brands and names is never a good idea. > > > > > > > > There's also gluonhq which is related to JavaFX which adds to the > > > > confusion, search engine friendliness is not high as well. > > > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
I support idea of putting brands of MXNet and Gluon closer together. I agree with your argument, Mu, but MXNet is quite far away from TF place at this time so I don’t know how well that argument is transferable from TF position to MXNet position. MXNet Imperative is definitely too restrictive of a name, we can come up with better one... MXNet-M for example, stands for MXNet-Modified (military connotation). If naming is the only thing we need to figure out - that is a good place to be in __ -- Thanks, Denis On 3/22/19, 4:48 PM, "Mu Li" wrote: Gluon is about imperative neural network training and data loading. ndarray is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also supports symbolic execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not be a good name for it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF talks about Keras. On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang wrote: > +1 > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan wrote: > > > +1. > > > > Just to give some of my real experience: > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many responses are "This seems > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" > > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who showed interests in > MXNet > > but none of the engineers knew the relationship between GluonNLP/GluonCV > > and MXNet > > 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding examples, I received > > comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in addition to MXNet?" > > > > Everyone is talking about PyTorch nowadays, but not Caffe2 anymore > although > > the latter is still serving as a backend component. Maybe we should also > > doubledown on one brand? > > > > Lin > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Pedro Larroy < > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi dev@ > > > > > > We heard feedback from users that the Gluon name is confusing. Some of > > > them don't even know it's MXNet and it's unclear the relationship with > > > MXNet > > > > > > Would it make sense to rebrand Gluon to just MXNet or MXNet > > > imperative? Diluting brands and names is never a good idea. > > > > > > There's also gluonhq which is related to JavaFX which adds to the > > > confusion, search engine friendliness is not high as well. > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
Gluon is about imperative neural network training and data loading. ndarray is another large imperative module. Besides, Gluon also supports symbolic execution after hybridizing. mxnet imperative might not be a good name for it. Another choice is high-level API, that's how TF talks about Keras. On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:38 PM Yuan Tang wrote: > +1 > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan wrote: > > > +1. > > > > Just to give some of my real experience: > > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many responses are "This seems > > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" > > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who showed interests in > MXNet > > but none of the engineers knew the relationship between GluonNLP/GluonCV > > and MXNet > > 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding examples, I received > > comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in addition to MXNet?" > > > > Everyone is talking about PyTorch nowadays, but not Caffe2 anymore > although > > the latter is still serving as a backend component. Maybe we should also > > doubledown on one brand? > > > > Lin > > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Pedro Larroy < > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi dev@ > > > > > > We heard feedback from users that the Gluon name is confusing. Some of > > > them don't even know it's MXNet and it's unclear the relationship with > > > MXNet > > > > > > Would it make sense to rebrand Gluon to just MXNet or MXNet > > > imperative? Diluting brands and names is never a good idea. > > > > > > There's also gluonhq which is related to JavaFX which adds to the > > > confusion, search engine friendliness is not high as well. > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
+1 On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 7:29 PM Lin Yuan wrote: > +1. > > Just to give some of my real experience: > 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many responses are "This seems > nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" > 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who showed interests in MXNet > but none of the engineers knew the relationship between GluonNLP/GluonCV > and MXNet > 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding examples, I received > comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in addition to MXNet?" > > Everyone is talking about PyTorch nowadays, but not Caffe2 anymore although > the latter is still serving as a backend component. Maybe we should also > doubledown on one brand? > > Lin > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Pedro Larroy > > wrote: > > > Hi dev@ > > > > We heard feedback from users that the Gluon name is confusing. Some of > > them don't even know it's MXNet and it's unclear the relationship with > > MXNet > > > > Would it make sense to rebrand Gluon to just MXNet or MXNet > > imperative? Diluting brands and names is never a good idea. > > > > There's also gluonhq which is related to JavaFX which adds to the > > confusion, search engine friendliness is not high as well. > > > > Pedro. > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
+1. Just to give some of my real experience: 1) I advertised a recent GluonNLP blog and many responses are "This seems nice. So is Gluon a new library to replace MXNet?" 2) We visited customers in a unicorn company who showed interests in MXNet but none of the engineers knew the relationship between GluonNLP/GluonCV and MXNet 3) When integrating MXNet to Horovod and adding examples, I received comments like "What is Gluon? Is it a new library in addition to MXNet?" Everyone is talking about PyTorch nowadays, but not Caffe2 anymore although the latter is still serving as a backend component. Maybe we should also doubledown on one brand? Lin On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Pedro Larroy wrote: > Hi dev@ > > We heard feedback from users that the Gluon name is confusing. Some of > them don't even know it's MXNet and it's unclear the relationship with > MXNet > > Would it make sense to rebrand Gluon to just MXNet or MXNet > imperative? Diluting brands and names is never a good idea. > > There's also gluonhq which is related to JavaFX which adds to the > confusion, search engine friendliness is not high as well. > > Pedro. >
[DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.
Hi dev@ We heard feedback from users that the Gluon name is confusing. Some of them don't even know it's MXNet and it's unclear the relationship with MXNet Would it make sense to rebrand Gluon to just MXNet or MXNet imperative? Diluting brands and names is never a good idea. There's also gluonhq which is related to JavaFX which adds to the confusion, search engine friendliness is not high as well. Pedro.
Re: CI unstable
Yes, you can see the changes in this PR: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/14504 Unfortunately, there are still a few issues left to fix. Best Anton пт, 22 марта 2019 г. в 18:10, Mu Li : > I saw CI is downloading from data.dmlc.ml. Changing it data.mxnet.io > should > fix this issue. Say > > http://data.dmlc.ml/models/imagenet/inception-bn/Inception-BN-0126.params > -> > http://data.mxnet.io/models/imagenet/inception-bn/Inception-BN-0126.params > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:57 AM Anton Chernov > wrote: > > > Dear MXNet Community, > > > > Since a few days we are experiencing problems with CI PR verification > > builds. For some reason unix-cpu builds get aborted. Potentially there > is a > > problem with gitlab.com from where dependencies are downloaded for > static > > MXNet builds. > > > > We are working hard on finding and fixing the issue. Please excuse the > > inconvenience. > > > > Best > > Anton > > >
Re: CI unstable
I saw CI is downloading from data.dmlc.ml. Changing it data.mxnet.io should fix this issue. Say http://data.dmlc.ml/models/imagenet/inception-bn/Inception-BN-0126.params -> http://data.mxnet.io/models/imagenet/inception-bn/Inception-BN-0126.params On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:57 AM Anton Chernov wrote: > Dear MXNet Community, > > Since a few days we are experiencing problems with CI PR verification > builds. For some reason unix-cpu builds get aborted. Potentially there is a > problem with gitlab.com from where dependencies are downloaded for static > MXNet builds. > > We are working hard on finding and fixing the issue. Please excuse the > inconvenience. > > Best > Anton >
