Hi Junru,
I am on v1.4.x , and my dmlc-core commit is this one :
https://github.com/dmlc/dmlc-core/tree/0a0e8addf92e1287fd7a25c6314016b8c0138dee
Anirudh
On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 8:30 PM Junru Shao wrote:
> Hey Anirudh,
>
> Although the vote has been closed, I am very interested in digging into
Hey Anirudh,
Although the vote has been closed, I am very interested in digging into
this issue.
I build on my EC2 machine using your instructions, and it seems that
everything is working fine...
Then, I noticed that your issue seems to be related to unittests in
dmlc-core, not in mxnet. Could
-1 (binding)
Is the cmake build failing for the 1.4.1 release tag ? Is this a known
issue ?
Did the following:
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
-DCUDA_TOOLKIT_ROOT_DIR=/usr/local/cuda
Hi Konstantin, Kellen,
Thank you guys for the very detailed explanation! I was lacking some
relevant contexts and previous discussions, which got me confused
previously.
My understanding that C++ is short of a perfect package manager. I totally
agree that for any C++ project, it would be great
Hi Junru,
> I am actually a bit concerned about the security issues. We are asked to
download binaries from third-party websites, which are not controlled or
validated by Apache
it's possible to run conan server inside apache network and download
binaries and sources only from this remote
>
So firstly let's try to keep our responses empathetic and avoid ad-hom
comments. It might be beneficial to take some time to review the Apache
Code of Conduct [1]. Konstantin has taken a lot of time to think about
dependency management in MXNet on a volunteer basis which is commendable.
Second,
I am actually a bit concerned about the security issues. We are asked to
download binaries from third-party websites, which are not controlled or
validated by Apache. Although it is claimed to be “decentralized”, I am
really not convinced where the security comes from.
In the meantime,
Hey Konstantin. Thanks for starting an email thread and sorry for the
confusion. I think the ides is that we should discuss and agree on
Conan.io adoption first on the dev list, then start merging PRs. Release
1.4.1 is already in testing and the 1.5 code freeze deadline is also near
so I think
No problem Damien, glad to have you helping us validating the release.
Just wanted to make suer we have enough votes to pass the general vote (the
next release step) and with Sheng I think we should.
On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 7:52 AM Damien Stanton
wrote:
> Ah, I misunderstood the
Ah, I misunderstood the binding/non-binding distinction. I am not a PPMC
member, so my vote is non-binding.
Best,
Damien
On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 3:19 AM kellen sunderland <
kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Junru could you give a quick summary of the binding / non-binding votes.
>
>
Hey,
This sounds likely. Yes, we’ll take a look, if they haven’t already.
"I'm trying real hard to be the shepherd." -Jules Winnfield
> On Apr 25, 2019, at 8:00 PM, Pedro Larroy
> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I see some DNS resolution failures on jenkins, I think this is the
> cause of jenkins not
+1 (non-binding)
Built MXNet from source for CPU target.
I was able to run the quantization example with MKLDNN at
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/tree/1.4.1.rc0/example/quantization
Philip.
On 2019/04/30 06:51:45, Junru Shao wrote:
> Dear MXNet community,
>
> This is the 3-day
Awesome. That should do it. Thanks Sheng, and Junru for being the manager
this time around.
On Fri, May 3, 2019, 12:24 AM Sheng Zha wrote:
> Hi Kellen,
>
> Of course, feel free to count in my vote if that’s ok. Since I helped
> prepare the artifacts I wasn’t sure if it was appropriate for me
hi Sheng Zha,
on pull request review I was told by Anirudh anirudhacharya and Roshani
Nagmote to start discussion/vote on the mxnet dev list. it seems to be a
vicious circle now - on GitHub I am told to use vote, and on vote I am told
to use GitHub, this doesn't help much.
FYI GitHub review
hi Sheng Zha,
on pull request review I was told by Anirudh anirudhacharya and Roshani
Nagmote to start discussion/vote on the mxnet dev list. it seems to be a
vicious circle now - on GitHub I am told to use vote, and on vote I am told
to use GitHub, this doesn't help much.
FYI GitHub review
Hi Kellen,
Of course, feel free to count in my vote if that’s ok. Since I helped prepare
the artifacts I wasn’t sure if it was appropriate for me to vote so I refrained
from voting till now.
+1
-sz
> On May 3, 2019, at 12:19 AM, kellen sunderland
> wrote:
>
> Hi Junru could you give a
Hi Junru could you give a quick summary of the binding / non-binding votes.
Damien just want to confirm, are you a member of the PPMC for MXNet?
Usually committers or community members (like most of us) are encouraged to
test and vote, but technically count as non-binding for releases.
Sheng can
Hi Konstantin,
While conan looks like an option that's worth exploring, given that your
request is to merge the pull request, I'd suggest that the request should go
through the regular pull request review and it doesn't really need a vote (as
it doesn't substitute reviews anyway)
If you would
Hi folks,
So far we have collected enough binding votes. Thank you guys for the hard
work testing the release!
The vote on dev@ is closed on May 02 23:59:59 (PST). Next, we are going to
vote for the Apache MXNet (incubating) release 1.4.1 on general@ tomorrow,
which starts on May 3 2019,
Dear MXNet community,
This is the 3-day vote to add conan support for Apache MXNet (incubating)
version v1.4.1.
The voting on dev@ list will start May 03 23:59:59 (PST) and close on May
06 23:59:59.
Background: conan is open-source, freeware, cross-platform package manager
for C and C++
Dear MXNet community,
This is the 3-day vote to add conan support for Apache MXNet (incubating)
version v1.4.1.
The voting on dev@ list will start May 03 23:59:59 (PST) and close on May
06 23:59:59.
Background: conan is open-source, freeware, cross-platform package manager
for C and C++
+1 (non-binding)
Passed all the code at zh.d2l.ai
On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 1:46 PM Joshua Z. Zhang wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Build from source with cuda/cudnn.
>
> - All tests passed
> - GluonCV unittest scripts passed
> - GluonCV training scripts passed
> - No issue with python
22 matches
Mail list logo
