From the linked discussion thread you can find comments that Flink does and
Spark used to but not any more.
I don’t intend to claim anything on this vote thread, though one thing is
clear: without this change, github activity doesn’t count as happening per
apache standard, because it didn’t hap
Hi Sina,
Do you encounter that issue during building MXNet from source (including tests)
or on your own code/test? Three days ago I was successful to build master via
VS2017 with Intel MKL+MKLDNN support. If you have an own test/code which fails,
please pull request it into master.
Regards.
>
-0.9
Do any other Apache projects do this? Seems really odd. Jira was posting to
dev for maybe 3 days and people were complaining like crazy about the
noise, and that was just a few tickets. Now we’re talking about possibly
hundreds of emails per day. ALL PR comments, commit notificatios, issue
mo
Thanks, Rahul. Out of the 4 conversations you listed that you think are not
necessary, I actually think the PR on coreml tool may be worth discussing.
For example, should it (and other tools) have a separate repo, and should
its version management be tied to mxnet.
And on:
> If people are forced
Hi S,
Keeping a separate list defeats the purpose, because then such conversation
is again not happening on dev, which is deemed to be in the "did not
happen" category. Also, conversations that are not relevant to you are
already happening on the list, and you're under no obligation to read them
a
-1
Keeping a separate email list for subscribing to github activities seems like a
better idea. One can always reference the issue/discussion/PR in the dev list
to initiate conversation. Biggest concern is that important discussion can get
buried in a flood of emails that are not completely rel
-1
We had such a thing before and people asked for the mails to be redirected
to a different list commits@ because of the flood of mails.
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8b834e39110381fadb8a0ab59185a8f52b8406247a1f281f7d691392@%3Cdev.mxnet.apache.org%3E
I don't know if people have a sense o
+1
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 12:55 PM Joshua Z. Zhang wrote:
>
> +1
>
> We NEED to bring valuable discussions to a centralized place (@dev for
> example) rather than scattered single threads.
> Per filter options, there are a lot we can do to improve the SNR.
>
> Zhi
>
> On 2018/07/17 16:26:01, She
+1
We NEED to bring valuable discussions to a centralized place (@dev for example)
rather than scattered single threads.
Per filter options, there are a lot we can do to improve the SNR.
Zhi
On 2018/07/17 16:26:01, Sheng Zha wrote:
> Hi Anirudh,
>
> 1. You need exactly one filter to filter o
FWIW: "from:notificati...@github.com AND to:dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
AND NOT to:me" but I'm sure you get the gist :)
Opt-in model applies to individuals rather than the dev list, because the
dev list is intended as an asynchronous way for new comers to easily follow
past technical discussi
FWIW: The filter needs to be more complicated than just
"from:notificati...@github.com". After all, if someone mentions me directly in
PR thread and/or I subscribe to only a particular PR, those emails will also
come from "notificati...@github.com". There are ways around that though.
It might
+1
Both GitHub activities and dev list are places for development. It will be
great if we could have a all-in-one place for such discussions. I believe
Sheng's proposal is a perfect solution.
On 2018/07/16 03:32:06, Sheng Zha wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm starting a vote on subscribing dev@ to Github
+1
Both GitHub activities and dev list are places for development. It will be
great if we could have a all-in-one place for such discussions. I believe
Sheng's proposal is a perfect solution.
On 2018/07/16 03:32:06, Sheng Zha wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm starting a vote on subscribing dev@ to Github act
+1
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 9:58 AM Anirudh wrote:
> Its not foregoing transparency since people can easily subscribe to the
> github activities individually. dev@ has been used till now for design
> discussions, other project discussions,
> votes etc. After we subscribe dev@ to all activities, I
Its not foregoing transparency since people can easily subscribe to the
github activities individually. dev@ has been used till now for design
discussions, other project discussions,
votes etc. After we subscribe dev@ to all activities, I am afraid dev@ will
be reduced to a forwarded mail box and i
-1,
unless we can keep this under control. It's not all of the PRs or Issues
worthwhile to be involved into discussion.
I hope we can put this under control such as @subscribe_dev as a bot to spread
the information to dev@.
Thanks,
Qing
On 7/17/18, 9:26 AM, "Lin Yuan" wrote:
+1, I thin
+1, I think they are very relevant to dev and as Aaron said we can always
set up personalized filter.
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 9:21 AM Aaron Markham
wrote:
> +1, I don't read your emails anyways. Just kidding. I think it would be
> good to see the action, even if I eventually have to setup filter
Hi Anirudh,
1. You need exactly one filter to filter out all the github notifications
on PRs and issues: "from:notificati...@github.com", and you'd get your S/N
ratio back.
2. Having the option to do design discussion on an issue or PR is actually
a good thing as many discussions are quite small a
+1, I don't read your emails anyways. Just kidding. I think it would be
good to see the action, even if I eventually have to setup filters if it
gets overwhelming.
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 9:15 AM, Tianqi Chen
wrote:
> +1, most of issue and PR activities are about development, and they belong
> t
+1, most of issue and PR activities are about development, and they belong
to dev. It also helps us to recognizes contributors who are actively
contributing but less vocal via emails -- there are many of them.
Tianqi
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 8:47 AM, Anirudh wrote:
> -1
>
> The low signal to noi
-1
The low signal to noise ratio would mean that we may miss important emails.
Even with the different filters that we may setup for dev@, the emails
would be too many to not miss the important ones. We would see more and
more people starting a design discussion on an issue or PR. Because of the
l
FWIW, neither can I.
> On Jul 16, 2018, at 8:45 PM, Anirudh wrote:
>
> Hi Sina,
>
> I am unable to reproduce this issue on 1.2.1.
>
> Anirudh
>
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 5:26 PM, Afrooze, Sina wrote:
>
>> I know voting is over for this release, but I think this issue may warrant
>> delaying
22 matches
Mail list logo
