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

2019-02-04 Thread Steffen Rochel
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:

https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5d4aa084e51e9be919d62bfd0e6d625f37318624124a033a5c48507c@%3Cdev.mxnet.apache.org%3E


The following issues have been raised with v1.4.0.rc2:
1. NOTICE year is wrong (2018): Not considered a stopping issue as release
was started in 2018.
2. TVM NOTICE missing - TVM NOTICE file was added post the commit ID used
in MXNet v1.4.0.rc2 release, not considered a stopping issue
3. build with make passes, but build with cmake failed in
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest
4. Recent MKLDNN upgrade prevents us from offering binary distribution for
earlier versions before OSX 10.13.

The vote results meet the release voting criteria as defined at
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes: 3 +1 binding
votes, no -1, more positive then negative votes.
I'm not sure there is a difference between -0 and +0 votes, but even if
there is a difference there are more positive vs. negative votes.

I do consider the issues raised not as show stoppers to move forward with
the release. I do suggest to get these issues addressed in the next release
or with a patch on version 1.4.0.
To give everybody a chance to way into my decision as release manger, I
will wait until Wednesday 9am PST (about 36h from now) before starting vote
on general list.
Please speak up asap if you think the release cannot move forward as is and
provide justification.

Regards,
Steffen


Re: [Announcement] New Committer -- Steffen Rochel

2019-02-04 Thread kellen sunderland
Great news.  Congrats Steffen.

On Mon, Feb 4, 2019, 5:29 PM Thomas DELTEIL  Welcome Steffen!
>
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019, 15:55 Marco de Abreu 
> > Welcome!
> >
> > Am Di., 5. Feb. 2019, 00:45 hat Chris Olivier 
> > geschrieben:
> >
> > > Dear Community:
> > >
> > > Please join me to welcome Steffen Rochel (steffenroc...@gmail.com) as
> a
> > > new
> > > committer of Apache (incubating) MXNet!
> > >
> > > Steffen has played a role in nearly every MXNet release in the past 18
> > > months, managed several of the wiki pages and has contributed in
> > expanding
> > > the community by managing and hosting meetups in different parts of the
> > > world.
> > >
> > > -Chris
> > >
> >
>


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

2019-02-04 Thread Zhao, Patric
Hi Sheng,

Thanks to raise this important issues. Sorry for the lack of validation since 
we don't have mac machine with earlier OS version in house.

I will contact with MKL-DNN team for the supports of earlier versions of OSX 
but I'm a little afraid the fix needs some extra-time.

Alternatively, several workarounds in my thoughts (I know it's not the perfect 
solution):

* using LLVM which can work crossing HW/OS generation 
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/blob/master/MKLDNN_README.md#2

* provide the binary build for different HW/OS like cuda, mxnet-cu90/92

* disable MKLDNN supports for earlier versions of HW/OS in MAC, only mxnet 
build.

I will update the status when get the feedback and schedule from MKL-DNN team.

Feel free to let us know if anything we can help.

Thanks,

--Patric


> -Original Message-
> From: Sheng Zha [mailto:szha@gmail.com]
> 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 OSX 10.13. This means we
> would need to drop the binary distribution support for OSX 10.11 and 10.12
> if we are to keep mkldnn as a dependency for mxnet-mkl. I'm inquiring
> whether Intel could extend the compatibility to earlier OSX [1], but even if
> this is solved upstream it would require an update on the mkldnn submodule.
> 
> -sz
> 
> [1] https://github.com/intel/mkl-dnn/issues/405
> 
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:47 PM Anirudh Subramanian
> 
> wrote:
> 
> > -0
> >
> > Thanks Steffen for your release efforts !
> >
> > Build from source works with make but fails with cmake for me.
> >
> >  cd build && cmake VERBOSE=1 -DUSE_CUDA=ON -DUSE_CUDNN=ON
> > -DUSE_OPENMP=ON -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Debug -
> DUSE_DIST_KVSTORE=0
> > -DUSE_OPENCV=1 -GNinja .. && ninja -v
> >
> > FAILED: : && /usr/bin/c++   -Wall -Wno-unknown-pragmas -fPIC -g -O0 -
> msse2
> > -std=c++11 -fopenmp -g  -pthread
> >
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unitte
> > st_lockfree.cc.o
> >
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unitte
> > st_param.cc.o
> >
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unitte
> > st_parser.cc.o
> >
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unitte
> > st_array_view.cc.o
> >
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unitte
> > st_any.cc.o
> >
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unitte
> > st_config.cc.o
> >
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unitte
> > st_threaditer.cc.o
> >
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unitte
> > st_serializer.cc.o
> >
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unitte
> > st_threaditer_exc_handling.cc.o
> >
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unitte
> > st_inputsplit.cc.o
> >
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unitte
> > st_logging.cc.o
> >
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unitte
> > st_json.cc.o
> >
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unitte
> > st_optional.cc.o
> >
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unitte
> > st_main.cc.o
> >
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unitte
> > st_env.cc.o
> >
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unitte
> > st_thread_group.cc.o -o
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/dmlc_unit_tests  -rdynamic
> > lib/libgtestd.a 3rdparty/dmlc-core/libdmlc.a -lpthread && :
> >
> > 3rdparty/dmlc-
> core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_logging.cc.o:
> > In function `Logging_basics_Test::TestBody()':
> >
> > /home/ubuntu/experimentals/1.4_release/build/../3rdparty/dmlc-
> core/test/unittest/unittest_logging.cc:19:
> > undefined reference to `testing::internal::DeathTest::Create(char
> > const*, testing::internal::RE const*, char const*, int,
> > testing::internal::DeathTest**)'
> > collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
> >
> >
> > Anirudh
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:09 PM Haibin Lin 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1 built from source on Linux and passed dist sync kvstore test.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 9:54 AM Lin Yuan  wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 build from source on MacOS 10.13.6 and tested mxnet-to-coreml
> > > converter.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 9:03 AM Indhu 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > Build from source and tested few examples from the examples folder.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Indu
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 6:21 PM Steffen Rochel <
> > steffenroc...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Sheng - thanks for the 

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

2019-02-04 Thread Sheng Zha
Also, recent MKLDNN upgrade prevents us from offering binary distribution
for earlier versions of OSX, as it now requires OSX 10.13. This means we
would need to drop the binary distribution support for OSX 10.11 and 10.12
if we are to keep mkldnn as a dependency for mxnet-mkl. I'm inquiring
whether Intel could extend the compatibility to earlier OSX [1], but even
if this is solved upstream it would require an update on the mkldnn
submodule.

-sz

[1] https://github.com/intel/mkl-dnn/issues/405

On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:47 PM Anirudh Subramanian 
wrote:

> -0
>
> Thanks Steffen for your release efforts !
>
> Build from source works with make but fails with cmake for me.
>
>  cd build && cmake VERBOSE=1 -DUSE_CUDA=ON -DUSE_CUDNN=ON -DUSE_OPENMP=ON
> -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Debug -DUSE_DIST_KVSTORE=0 -DUSE_OPENCV=1 -GNinja .. &&
> ninja -v
>
> FAILED: : && /usr/bin/c++   -Wall -Wno-unknown-pragmas -fPIC -g -O0 -msse2
> -std=c++11 -fopenmp -g  -pthread
>
> 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_lockfree.cc.o
>
> 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_param.cc.o
>
> 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_parser.cc.o
>
> 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_array_view.cc.o
>
> 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_any.cc.o
>
> 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_config.cc.o
>
> 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_threaditer.cc.o
>
> 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_serializer.cc.o
>
> 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_threaditer_exc_handling.cc.o
>
> 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_inputsplit.cc.o
>
> 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_logging.cc.o
>
> 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_json.cc.o
>
> 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_optional.cc.o
>
> 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_main.cc.o
>
> 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_env.cc.o
>
> 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_thread_group.cc.o
> -o 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/dmlc_unit_tests  -rdynamic
> lib/libgtestd.a 3rdparty/dmlc-core/libdmlc.a -lpthread && :
>
> 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_logging.cc.o:
> In function `Logging_basics_Test::TestBody()':
>
> /home/ubuntu/experimentals/1.4_release/build/../3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/unittest_logging.cc:19:
> undefined reference to `testing::internal::DeathTest::Create(char const*,
> testing::internal::RE const*, char const*, int,
> testing::internal::DeathTest**)'
> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
>
>
> Anirudh
>
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:09 PM Haibin Lin 
> wrote:
>
> > +1 built from source on Linux and passed dist sync kvstore test.
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 9:54 AM Lin Yuan  wrote:
> >
> > > +1 build from source on MacOS 10.13.6 and tested mxnet-to-coreml
> > converter.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 9:03 AM Indhu  wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > Build from source and tested few examples from the examples folder.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Indu
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 6:21 PM Steffen Rochel <
> steffenroc...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Sheng - thanks for the feedback.
> > > > > TVM notice  file is missing as the 1.4.x branch/v1.4.0 release is
> > using
> > > > TVM
> > > > > commit 0f053c8
> > > > > <
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/dmlc/tvm/commit/0f053c82a747b4dcdf49570ec87c17e0067b7439
> > > > > >
> > > > >  from Oct 8, 2018, which didn't have the NOTICE file. IMHO, MXNet
> > > NOTICE
> > > > > file is consistent with release content.
> > > > > As the release started in 2018 I do think it is ok to move forward
> > w/o
> > > > > update to 2019 IMHO.
> > > > >
> > > > > All -
> > > > > thanks to the committers/contributors (Tao, Aaron, Kellen, Aston,
> > Yuxi)
> > > > who
> > > > > tested and provided feedback - we have five +1 votes.
> > > > > As of today, Friday Feb 1st 2019 6pm PST we have two binding votes,
> > one
> > > > +1
> > > > > (Carin), one +0 (Sheng). The vote continues be open waiting for
> > > feedback
> > > > > from PMC members.
> > > > > Hope you can spare some time over the weekend to provide feedback.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Steffen
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 12:44 AM Marco de Abreu <
> > > marco.g.ab...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Considering the release process has been started last year and
> the
> > > code
> > > > > tag
> > > > > > has also been based on last year, I'd say that it is not 

Re: [Announcement] New Committer -- Steffen Rochel

2019-02-04 Thread Thomas DELTEIL
Welcome Steffen!

On Mon, Feb 4, 2019, 15:55 Marco de Abreu  Welcome!
>
> Am Di., 5. Feb. 2019, 00:45 hat Chris Olivier 
> geschrieben:
>
> > Dear Community:
> >
> > Please join me to welcome Steffen Rochel (steffenroc...@gmail.com) as a
> > new
> > committer of Apache (incubating) MXNet!
> >
> > Steffen has played a role in nearly every MXNet release in the past 18
> > months, managed several of the wiki pages and has contributed in
> expanding
> > the community by managing and hosting meetups in different parts of the
> > world.
> >
> > -Chris
> >
>


Re: website updates & redesign

2019-02-04 Thread Aaron Markham
Thanks Marco. Any tutorial that is executable should have the minimum
version indicated in its prerequisites section. Even so, we're not
testing tutorials against previous versions so while the info would be
stated we'd only really be testing against master, AFAIK.
I'm inclined to creates guides on how to generate legacy documentation
for each API, and remove the complexity of versions from the CI
pipeline. One-off generated API docs of old versions could be hosted,
but not part of the publishing and CI pipeline. This would be more
like PyTorch. https://pytorch.org/docs/versions.html We have to do a
bit better than that since we have so many language bindings with
varying degrees of support across versions. And we should make sure
that search works across versions and is clearly labelled, so you know
what you're looking at.

On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 4:30 PM Marco de Abreu  wrote:
>
> Great design!
>
> The different versioning is a good point, thanks for bringing it up. Could
> you elaborate on how we will handle the situation of different versions of
> mxnet in future (e.g. examples that require a minimum version)? I assume we
> will revamp the website build process as part of these efforts, right?
>
> Best regards
> Marco
>
> Am Di., 5. Feb. 2019, 01:22 hat Aaron Markham 
> geschrieben:
>
> > Hello MXNet folks!
> >
> > As I mentioned last week, I'm soliciting feedback on a website
> > redesign. Some of you may have seen the beta site that Mu has been
> > working on, which is a big step in the right direction for the
> > automatically generated API docs. I've posted a wiki article [1] that
> > proposes how to flesh out the new site with an information
> > architecture, user flows, and wireframes useful for a design
> > treatment. I look forward to your feedback - if not here or on the
> > wiki, let's get a discussion going in Slack. Just ping me there.
> >
> > As a side note and follow up to fixing the redirects on the website, I
> > needed to add an artifacts flag in the doc's settings.ini file [2].
> > This setting is triggered in mxdoc.py and lets you take files needed
> > for the docs build from master (or your branch) and apply them to old
> > version branches that you're building for the website. This also
> > transitions some of logic from the post-processing versions update
> > step during web publishing.
> >
> > [1] Website redesign information architecture and wireframe:
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/vAMlBg
> > [2] Website publish updates:
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/14015
> > Cheers,
> > Aaron
> >


Re: website updates & redesign

2019-02-04 Thread Marco de Abreu
Great design!

The different versioning is a good point, thanks for bringing it up. Could
you elaborate on how we will handle the situation of different versions of
mxnet in future (e.g. examples that require a minimum version)? I assume we
will revamp the website build process as part of these efforts, right?

Best regards
Marco

Am Di., 5. Feb. 2019, 01:22 hat Aaron Markham 
geschrieben:

> Hello MXNet folks!
>
> As I mentioned last week, I'm soliciting feedback on a website
> redesign. Some of you may have seen the beta site that Mu has been
> working on, which is a big step in the right direction for the
> automatically generated API docs. I've posted a wiki article [1] that
> proposes how to flesh out the new site with an information
> architecture, user flows, and wireframes useful for a design
> treatment. I look forward to your feedback - if not here or on the
> wiki, let's get a discussion going in Slack. Just ping me there.
>
> As a side note and follow up to fixing the redirects on the website, I
> needed to add an artifacts flag in the doc's settings.ini file [2].
> This setting is triggered in mxdoc.py and lets you take files needed
> for the docs build from master (or your branch) and apply them to old
> version branches that you're building for the website. This also
> transitions some of logic from the post-processing versions update
> step during web publishing.
>
> [1] Website redesign information architecture and wireframe:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/vAMlBg
> [2] Website publish updates:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/14015
> Cheers,
> Aaron
>


website updates & redesign

2019-02-04 Thread Aaron Markham
Hello MXNet folks!

As I mentioned last week, I'm soliciting feedback on a website
redesign. Some of you may have seen the beta site that Mu has been
working on, which is a big step in the right direction for the
automatically generated API docs. I've posted a wiki article [1] that
proposes how to flesh out the new site with an information
architecture, user flows, and wireframes useful for a design
treatment. I look forward to your feedback - if not here or on the
wiki, let's get a discussion going in Slack. Just ping me there.

As a side note and follow up to fixing the redirects on the website, I
needed to add an artifacts flag in the doc's settings.ini file [2].
This setting is triggered in mxdoc.py and lets you take files needed
for the docs build from master (or your branch) and apply them to old
version branches that you're building for the website. This also
transitions some of logic from the post-processing versions update
step during web publishing.

[1] Website redesign information architecture and wireframe:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/vAMlBg
[2] Website publish updates:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/14015
Cheers,
Aaron


Re: [Announcement] New Committer -- Steffen Rochel

2019-02-04 Thread Marco de Abreu
Welcome!

Am Di., 5. Feb. 2019, 00:45 hat Chris Olivier 
geschrieben:

> Dear Community:
>
> Please join me to welcome Steffen Rochel (steffenroc...@gmail.com) as a
> new
> committer of Apache (incubating) MXNet!
>
> Steffen has played a role in nearly every MXNet release in the past 18
> months, managed several of the wiki pages and has contributed in expanding
> the community by managing and hosting meetups in different parts of the
> world.
>
> -Chris
>


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

2019-02-04 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
-0

Thanks Steffen for your release efforts !

Build from source works with make but fails with cmake for me.

 cd build && cmake VERBOSE=1 -DUSE_CUDA=ON -DUSE_CUDNN=ON -DUSE_OPENMP=ON
-DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Debug -DUSE_DIST_KVSTORE=0 -DUSE_OPENCV=1 -GNinja .. &&
ninja -v

FAILED: : && /usr/bin/c++   -Wall -Wno-unknown-pragmas -fPIC -g -O0 -msse2
-std=c++11 -fopenmp -g  -pthread
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_lockfree.cc.o
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_param.cc.o
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_parser.cc.o
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_array_view.cc.o
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_any.cc.o
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_config.cc.o
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_threaditer.cc.o
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_serializer.cc.o
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_threaditer_exc_handling.cc.o
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_inputsplit.cc.o
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_logging.cc.o
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_json.cc.o
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_optional.cc.o
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_main.cc.o
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_env.cc.o
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_thread_group.cc.o
-o 3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/dmlc_unit_tests  -rdynamic
lib/libgtestd.a 3rdparty/dmlc-core/libdmlc.a -lpthread && :
3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/CMakeFiles/dmlc_unit_tests.dir/unittest_logging.cc.o:
In function `Logging_basics_Test::TestBody()':
/home/ubuntu/experimentals/1.4_release/build/../3rdparty/dmlc-core/test/unittest/unittest_logging.cc:19:
undefined reference to `testing::internal::DeathTest::Create(char const*,
testing::internal::RE const*, char const*, int,
testing::internal::DeathTest**)'
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status


Anirudh

On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:09 PM Haibin Lin  wrote:

> +1 built from source on Linux and passed dist sync kvstore test.
>
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 9:54 AM Lin Yuan  wrote:
>
> > +1 build from source on MacOS 10.13.6 and tested mxnet-to-coreml
> converter.
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 9:03 AM Indhu  wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > Build from source and tested few examples from the examples folder.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Indu
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 6:21 PM Steffen Rochel  >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Sheng - thanks for the feedback.
> > > > TVM notice  file is missing as the 1.4.x branch/v1.4.0 release is
> using
> > > TVM
> > > > commit 0f053c8
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/dmlc/tvm/commit/0f053c82a747b4dcdf49570ec87c17e0067b7439
> > > > >
> > > >  from Oct 8, 2018, which didn't have the NOTICE file. IMHO, MXNet
> > NOTICE
> > > > file is consistent with release content.
> > > > As the release started in 2018 I do think it is ok to move forward
> w/o
> > > > update to 2019 IMHO.
> > > >
> > > > All -
> > > > thanks to the committers/contributors (Tao, Aaron, Kellen, Aston,
> Yuxi)
> > > who
> > > > tested and provided feedback - we have five +1 votes.
> > > > As of today, Friday Feb 1st 2019 6pm PST we have two binding votes,
> one
> > > +1
> > > > (Carin), one +0 (Sheng). The vote continues be open waiting for
> > feedback
> > > > from PMC members.
> > > > Hope you can spare some time over the weekend to provide feedback.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Steffen
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 12:44 AM Marco de Abreu <
> > marco.g.ab...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Considering the release process has been started last year and the
> > code
> > > > tag
> > > > > has also been based on last year, I'd say that it is not really a
> big
> > > > deal.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Marco
> > > > >
> > > > > Am Fr., 1. Feb. 2019, 09:33 hat Sheng Zha 
> > > > > geschrieben:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I found an awesome checklist for incubator releases [1] so I'm
> > using
> > > it
> > > > > > here:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -[Y] Are release files in correct location?
> > > > > > -[Y] Do release files have the word incubating in their name?
> > > > > > -[Y] Are the digital signature and hashes correct?
> > > > > > -[Y] Does DISCLAIMER file exist?
> > > > > > -[Y] Do LICENSE and NOTICE files exists?
> > > > > > -[N/A] Is the LICENSE and NOTICE text correct? (sz: did not
> finish
> > > > > > checking)
> > > > > > -[N] Is the NOTICE year correct?
> > > > > > -[N/A] Un-included software dependencies are not mentioned in
> > LICENSE
> > > > or
> > > > > > NOTICE? (sz: 

[Announcement] New Committer -- Steffen Rochel

2019-02-04 Thread Chris Olivier
Dear Community:

Please join me to welcome Steffen Rochel (steffenroc...@gmail.com) as a new
committer of Apache (incubating) MXNet!

Steffen has played a role in nearly every MXNet release in the past 18
months, managed several of the wiki pages and has contributed in expanding
the community by managing and hosting meetups in different parts of the
world.

-Chris


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

2019-02-04 Thread Haibin Lin
+1 built from source on Linux and passed dist sync kvstore test.

On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 9:54 AM Lin Yuan  wrote:

> +1 build from source on MacOS 10.13.6 and tested mxnet-to-coreml converter.
>
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 9:03 AM Indhu  wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Build from source and tested few examples from the examples folder.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Indu
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 6:21 PM Steffen Rochel 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Sheng - thanks for the feedback.
> > > TVM notice  file is missing as the 1.4.x branch/v1.4.0 release is using
> > TVM
> > > commit 0f053c8
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/dmlc/tvm/commit/0f053c82a747b4dcdf49570ec87c17e0067b7439
> > > >
> > >  from Oct 8, 2018, which didn't have the NOTICE file. IMHO, MXNet
> NOTICE
> > > file is consistent with release content.
> > > As the release started in 2018 I do think it is ok to move forward w/o
> > > update to 2019 IMHO.
> > >
> > > All -
> > > thanks to the committers/contributors (Tao, Aaron, Kellen, Aston, Yuxi)
> > who
> > > tested and provided feedback - we have five +1 votes.
> > > As of today, Friday Feb 1st 2019 6pm PST we have two binding votes, one
> > +1
> > > (Carin), one +0 (Sheng). The vote continues be open waiting for
> feedback
> > > from PMC members.
> > > Hope you can spare some time over the weekend to provide feedback.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Steffen
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 12:44 AM Marco de Abreu <
> marco.g.ab...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Considering the release process has been started last year and the
> code
> > > tag
> > > > has also been based on last year, I'd say that it is not really a big
> > > deal.
> > > >
> > > > -Marco
> > > >
> > > > Am Fr., 1. Feb. 2019, 09:33 hat Sheng Zha 
> > > > geschrieben:
> > > >
> > > > > I found an awesome checklist for incubator releases [1] so I'm
> using
> > it
> > > > > here:
> > > > >
> > > > > -[Y] Are release files in correct location?
> > > > > -[Y] Do release files have the word incubating in their name?
> > > > > -[Y] Are the digital signature and hashes correct?
> > > > > -[Y] Does DISCLAIMER file exist?
> > > > > -[Y] Do LICENSE and NOTICE files exists?
> > > > > -[N/A] Is the LICENSE and NOTICE text correct? (sz: did not finish
> > > > > checking)
> > > > > -[N] Is the NOTICE year correct?
> > > > > -[N/A] Un-included software dependencies are not mentioned in
> LICENSE
> > > or
> > > > > NOTICE? (sz: did not finish checking)
> > > > > -[Y] License information is not mentioned in NOTICE?
> > > > > Is there any 3rd party code contained inside the release? If so:
> > > > > -[Y] Does the software have a compatible license?
> > > > > -[Y] Are all software licenses mentioned in LICENSE?
> > > > > -[Y] Is the full text of the licenses (or pointers to it) in
> LICENSE?
> > > > > Is any of this code Apache licensed? Do they have NOTICE files? If
> > so:
> > > > > -[N] Have relevant parts of those NOTICE files been added to this
> > > NOTICE
> > > > > file?
> > > > > TVM has Apache 2.0 license and its NOTICE hasn't been added to
> > MXNet's
> > > > > NOTICE file.
> > > > > -[Y] 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?
> > > > > -[N] Are there any unexpected binary files in the release?
> > > > > -[Y] Can you compile from source? Are the instruction clear?
> > > > >
> > > > > Is the issue minor?
> > > > > - Unsure. 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 vote with:
> > > > > +0 not sure if it should be released. Could mentors advise if we
> > should
> > > > fix
> > > > > them before release?
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorReleaseChecklist
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:56 PM Lv, Tao A 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +1. Verified 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
> > > > throughput
> > > > > > 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, thanks Steffen!  I added a few key files but missed that
> > one.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +1 from me.

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

2019-02-04 Thread Lin Yuan
+1 build from source on MacOS 10.13.6 and tested mxnet-to-coreml converter.

On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 9:03 AM Indhu  wrote:

> +1
>
> Build from source and tested few examples from the examples folder.
>
> Thanks,
> Indu
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 6:21 PM Steffen Rochel 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Sheng - thanks for the feedback.
> > TVM notice  file is missing as the 1.4.x branch/v1.4.0 release is using
> TVM
> > commit 0f053c8
> > <
> >
> https://github.com/dmlc/tvm/commit/0f053c82a747b4dcdf49570ec87c17e0067b7439
> > >
> >  from Oct 8, 2018, which didn't have the NOTICE file. IMHO, MXNet NOTICE
> > file is consistent with release content.
> > As the release started in 2018 I do think it is ok to move forward w/o
> > update to 2019 IMHO.
> >
> > All -
> > thanks to the committers/contributors (Tao, Aaron, Kellen, Aston, Yuxi)
> who
> > tested and provided feedback - we have five +1 votes.
> > As of today, Friday Feb 1st 2019 6pm PST we have two binding votes, one
> +1
> > (Carin), one +0 (Sheng). The vote continues be open waiting for feedback
> > from PMC members.
> > Hope you can spare some time over the weekend to provide feedback.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Steffen
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 12:44 AM Marco de Abreu 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Considering the release process has been started last year and the code
> > tag
> > > has also been based on last year, I'd say that it is not really a big
> > deal.
> > >
> > > -Marco
> > >
> > > Am Fr., 1. Feb. 2019, 09:33 hat Sheng Zha 
> > > geschrieben:
> > >
> > > > I found an awesome checklist for incubator releases [1] so I'm using
> it
> > > > here:
> > > >
> > > > -[Y] Are release files in correct location?
> > > > -[Y] Do release files have the word incubating in their name?
> > > > -[Y] Are the digital signature and hashes correct?
> > > > -[Y] Does DISCLAIMER file exist?
> > > > -[Y] Do LICENSE and NOTICE files exists?
> > > > -[N/A] Is the LICENSE and NOTICE text correct? (sz: did not finish
> > > > checking)
> > > > -[N] Is the NOTICE year correct?
> > > > -[N/A] Un-included software dependencies are not mentioned in LICENSE
> > or
> > > > NOTICE? (sz: did not finish checking)
> > > > -[Y] License information is not mentioned in NOTICE?
> > > > Is there any 3rd party code contained inside the release? If so:
> > > > -[Y] Does the software have a compatible license?
> > > > -[Y] Are all software licenses mentioned in LICENSE?
> > > > -[Y] Is the full text of the licenses (or pointers to it) in LICENSE?
> > > > Is any of this code Apache licensed? Do they have NOTICE files? If
> so:
> > > > -[N] Have relevant parts of those NOTICE files been added to this
> > NOTICE
> > > > file?
> > > > TVM has Apache 2.0 license and its NOTICE hasn't been added to
> MXNet's
> > > > NOTICE file.
> > > > -[Y] 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?
> > > > -[N] Are there any unexpected binary files in the release?
> > > > -[Y] Can you compile from source? Are the instruction clear?
> > > >
> > > > Is the issue minor?
> > > > - Unsure. 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 vote with:
> > > > +0 not sure if it should be released. Could mentors advise if we
> should
> > > fix
> > > > them before release?
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorReleaseChecklist
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:56 PM Lv, Tao A 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > +1. Verified 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
> > > throughput
> > > > > 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, 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 <
> > > steffenroc...@gmail.com>
> > > > > 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 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/mxnet/KEYS
> > -o
> > > > > > KEYS
> > > > 

Re: [Announcement] New Committer -- Lin Yuan

2019-02-04 Thread Lin Yuan
Thanks folks! I am looking forward to working with you to make MXNet shine
in 2019!

Best,

Lin

On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 4:31 PM Qing Lan  wrote:

> Congrats Lin!
> >
> >
> > Congratulations Lin
> >
> >> On Sat, Feb 2, 2019, 3:27 PM Tianqi Chen  wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear Community:
> >>
> >> Please join me to welcome Lin Yuan(@apeforest) as a new committer of
> >> Apache(incubating) MXNet!
> >>
> >> He has contributed to various improvements, including better
> compatibility
> >> of larger arrays across the codebase.
> >>
> >> Commits:
> >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commits?author=apeforest
> >>
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93=is%3Apr+author%3Aapeforest
> >>
> >>
> >> Reviews:
> >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pulls?utf8=%
> >> E2%9C%93=reviewed-by%3Aapeforest
> >>
> >> dev@ activitivity
> >> https://lists.apache.org/list.html?*@mxnet.apache.org:lte=6M:Lin%20Yuan
> >>
> >> Tianqi
> >>
>


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

2019-02-04 Thread Indhu
+1

Build from source and tested few examples from the examples folder.

Thanks,
Indu



On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 6:21 PM Steffen Rochel 
wrote:

> Hi Sheng - thanks for the feedback.
> TVM notice  file is missing as the 1.4.x branch/v1.4.0 release is using TVM
> commit 0f053c8
> <
> https://github.com/dmlc/tvm/commit/0f053c82a747b4dcdf49570ec87c17e0067b7439
> >
>  from Oct 8, 2018, which didn't have the NOTICE file. IMHO, MXNet NOTICE
> file is consistent with release content.
> As the release started in 2018 I do think it is ok to move forward w/o
> update to 2019 IMHO.
>
> All -
> thanks to the committers/contributors (Tao, Aaron, Kellen, Aston, Yuxi) who
> tested and provided feedback - we have five +1 votes.
> As of today, Friday Feb 1st 2019 6pm PST we have two binding votes, one +1
> (Carin), one +0 (Sheng). The vote continues be open waiting for feedback
> from PMC members.
> Hope you can spare some time over the weekend to provide feedback.
>
> Regards,
> Steffen
>
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 12:44 AM Marco de Abreu 
> wrote:
>
> > Considering the release process has been started last year and the code
> tag
> > has also been based on last year, I'd say that it is not really a big
> deal.
> >
> > -Marco
> >
> > Am Fr., 1. Feb. 2019, 09:33 hat Sheng Zha 
> > geschrieben:
> >
> > > I found an awesome checklist for incubator releases [1] so I'm using it
> > > here:
> > >
> > > -[Y] Are release files in correct location?
> > > -[Y] Do release files have the word incubating in their name?
> > > -[Y] Are the digital signature and hashes correct?
> > > -[Y] Does DISCLAIMER file exist?
> > > -[Y] Do LICENSE and NOTICE files exists?
> > > -[N/A] Is the LICENSE and NOTICE text correct? (sz: did not finish
> > > checking)
> > > -[N] Is the NOTICE year correct?
> > > -[N/A] Un-included software dependencies are not mentioned in LICENSE
> or
> > > NOTICE? (sz: did not finish checking)
> > > -[Y] License information is not mentioned in NOTICE?
> > > Is there any 3rd party code contained inside the release? If so:
> > > -[Y] Does the software have a compatible license?
> > > -[Y] Are all software licenses mentioned in LICENSE?
> > > -[Y] Is the full text of the licenses (or pointers to it) in LICENSE?
> > > Is any of this code Apache licensed? Do they have NOTICE files? If so:
> > > -[N] Have relevant parts of those NOTICE files been added to this
> NOTICE
> > > file?
> > > TVM has Apache 2.0 license and its NOTICE hasn't been added to MXNet's
> > > NOTICE file.
> > > -[Y] 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?
> > > -[N] Are there any unexpected binary files in the release?
> > > -[Y] Can you compile from source? Are the instruction clear?
> > >
> > > Is the issue minor?
> > > - Unsure. 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 vote with:
> > > +0 not sure if it should be released. Could mentors advise if we should
> > fix
> > > them before release?
> > >
> > > [1] https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorReleaseChecklist
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:56 PM Lv, Tao A  wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > +1. Verified 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
> > throughput
> > > > 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, 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 <
> > steffenroc...@gmail.com>
> > > > 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 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
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > output:
> > > > >
> > > > > gpg: assuming signed data in
> > > > 'apache-mxnet-src-1.4.0.rc2-incubating.tar.gz'
> > > > >
> > > > > gpg: Signature made Sat Jan 26 16:25:41 2019 PST
> > > > >
> > > > > gpg:using RSA key
> > > >