Re: Join slack channel
Invited. Welcome! On 2019/07/19 21:23:58, Xingjian SHI wrote: > >
Join slack channel
Re: [Discuss] MXNet Python 2 Support Deprecation
+1 On 7/19/19, 12:59 PM, "Zhu Zhaoqi" wrote: +1 Lin Yuan 于2019年7月19日周五 上午12:06写道： > +1 > > On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 12:03 AM Chaitanya Bapat > wrote: > > > +1 definitely. > > > > Going forward, > > MXNet repo as it stands has ~95,000+ lines of Python code [1] > > OpenEdx has a million (10x) LOC and this mammoth effort of porting from > > Python 2 to 3 is treated as a separate project named Incremental > > Improvement. [2] > > We can take inspiration from them and have a similar effort by calling > > action from the community. Issues can be maintained in a separate JIRA > > board to track high priority tasks. > > > > Also, I can see gluon-nlp adding themselves to the Python3 statement. > Once > > the vote passes, one of us could submit a PR to add MXNet as well. > > > > [1] https://codeclimate.com/ > > [2] > > > https://open.edx.org/blog/python-2-is-ending-we-need-to-move-to-python-3/ > > > > > > On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 at 21:39, Kshitij Kalambarkar < > > kshitijkalambar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 19, 2019, 04:28 Pedro Larroy > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Seems 3.6 is a reasonable choice. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 2:15 PM Marco de Abreu < > > marco.g.ab...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Looking at EOL is certainly a good idea! I think once we get closer > > to > > > > > deprecation, we can check adoption statistics to make a > well-informed > > > > > decision that gives us the most advantages without dropping the > ball > > > on a > > > > > majority of users (or supporting a branch that is going EOL soon). > A > > > > survey > > > > > from 2018 [1] determined the following distribution: > > > > > 3.5: 11% > > > > > 3.6: 54% > > > > > 3.7: 30% > > > > > > > > > > Deprecation for 3.5 is scheduled for 2020-09-13 [2]. Deprecation > for > > > 3.6 > > > > is > > > > > scheduled for 2021-12-23 [2].Deprecation for 3.7 is scheduled > > > > > for 2023-06-27 [2]. > > > > > > > > > > Following the trend, I'd say that it would be a decision between > > Python > > > > 3.6 > > > > > and 3.7. Later on, I'd propose to check recent surveys and also > have > > a > > > > > separate thread to determine if there's anything we're missing > (e.g. > > a > > > > big > > > > > company being unable to use Python 3.7). What do you think? > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > Marco > > > > > > > > > > [1]: > > https://www.jetbrains.com/research/python-developers-survey-2018/ > > > > > [2]: https://devguide.python.org/#status-of-python-branches > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 9:42 PM Yuan Tang > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I would suggest supporting Python 3.5+ since the earlier versions > > > have > > > > > > reached end-of-life status: > > > > > > https://devguide.python.org/devcycle/#end-of-life-branches > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 3:36 PM Pedro Larroy < > > > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This would simplify CI, reduce costs and more. I think a > followup > > > > > > > question is what would be the mininum Python3 version > supported? > > > > > > > Depending on that we might be able to use type annotations for > > > > example > > > > > > > or other features. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 12:07 PM Yuan Tang < > > > terrytangy...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 2:51 PM Yuxi Hu < > darreny...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:31 AM Tong He < > > hetong...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tong He > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jake Lee 于2019年7月18日周四 上午11:29写道： > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:27 AM Junru Shao < > > > > > > > junrushao1...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:12 AM Anirudh Acharya < > > > > > > > > > > anirudhk...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [Discuss] MXNet Python 2 Support Deprecation
+1 Lin Yuan 于2019年7月19日周五 上午12:06写道： > +1 > > On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 12:03 AM Chaitanya Bapat > wrote: > > > +1 definitely. > > > > Going forward, > > MXNet repo as it stands has ~95,000+ lines of Python code [1] > > OpenEdx has a million (10x) LOC and this mammoth effort of porting from > > Python 2 to 3 is treated as a separate project named Incremental > > Improvement. [2] > > We can take inspiration from them and have a similar effort by calling > > action from the community. Issues can be maintained in a separate JIRA > > board to track high priority tasks. > > > > Also, I can see gluon-nlp adding themselves to the Python3 statement. > Once > > the vote passes, one of us could submit a PR to add MXNet as well. > > > > [1] https://codeclimate.com/ > > [2] > > > https://open.edx.org/blog/python-2-is-ending-we-need-to-move-to-python-3/ > > > > > > On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 at 21:39, Kshitij Kalambarkar < > > kshitijkalambar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 19, 2019, 04:28 Pedro Larroy > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Seems 3.6 is a reasonable choice. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 2:15 PM Marco de Abreu < > > marco.g.ab...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Looking at EOL is certainly a good idea! I think once we get closer > > to > > > > > deprecation, we can check adoption statistics to make a > well-informed > > > > > decision that gives us the most advantages without dropping the > ball > > > on a > > > > > majority of users (or supporting a branch that is going EOL soon). > A > > > > survey > > > > > from 2018 [1] determined the following distribution: > > > > > 3.5: 11% > > > > > 3.6: 54% > > > > > 3.7: 30% > > > > > > > > > > Deprecation for 3.5 is scheduled for 2020-09-13 [2]. Deprecation > for > > > 3.6 > > > > is > > > > > scheduled for 2021-12-23 [2].Deprecation for 3.7 is scheduled > > > > > for 2023-06-27 [2]. > > > > > > > > > > Following the trend, I'd say that it would be a decision between > > Python > > > > 3.6 > > > > > and 3.7. Later on, I'd propose to check recent surveys and also > have > > a > > > > > separate thread to determine if there's anything we're missing > (e.g. > > a > > > > big > > > > > company being unable to use Python 3.7). What do you think? > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > Marco > > > > > > > > > > [1]: > > https://www.jetbrains.com/research/python-developers-survey-2018/ > > > > > [2]: https://devguide.python.org/#status-of-python-branches > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 9:42 PM Yuan Tang > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I would suggest supporting Python 3.5+ since the earlier versions > > > have > > > > > > reached end-of-life status: > > > > > > https://devguide.python.org/devcycle/#end-of-life-branches > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 3:36 PM Pedro Larroy < > > > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This would simplify CI, reduce costs and more. I think a > followup > > > > > > > question is what would be the mininum Python3 version > supported? > > > > > > > Depending on that we might be able to use type annotations for > > > > example > > > > > > > or other features. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 12:07 PM Yuan Tang < > > > terrytangy...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 2:51 PM Yuxi Hu < > darreny...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:31 AM Tong He < > > hetong...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tong He > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jake Lee 于2019年7月18日周四 上午11:29写道： > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:27 AM Junru Shao < > > > > > > > junrushao1...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:12 AM Anirudh Acharya < > > > > > > > > > > anirudhk...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:03 AM Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > > > > > > marco.g.ab...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Marco > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sheng Zha schrieb am Do., > > 18. > > > > Juli > > > > > > > 2019, > > > > > > > > > > > 19:59: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear MXNet community, > > > > > > > >
Speed regression in CI (Unix-GPU)
Hi, I've noticed some speed regressions in CI (especially around unix-gpu, the most time-consuming one) which I'm currently unable to track down due to other commitments. If somebody has some spare time and would like to assist speeding up the CI pipeline, I'd appreciate it they could have a look at it. mxnet-validation/unix-gpu: https://i.imgur.com/7IrfUi4.png mxnet-validation/unix-cpu: https://i.imgur.com/TFAebIm.png mxnet-validation/windows-gpu: https://i.imgur.com/OXu5nl6.png mxnet-validation/windows-cpu: https://i.imgur.com/QRs61iM.png If you need additional information, please let me know. Thanks in advance! Best regards, Marco
Re: [Discuss] MXNet Python 2 Support Deprecation
+1 On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 12:03 AM Chaitanya Bapat wrote: > +1 definitely. > > Going forward, > MXNet repo as it stands has ~95,000+ lines of Python code [1] > OpenEdx has a million (10x) LOC and this mammoth effort of porting from > Python 2 to 3 is treated as a separate project named Incremental > Improvement. [2] > We can take inspiration from them and have a similar effort by calling > action from the community. Issues can be maintained in a separate JIRA > board to track high priority tasks. > > Also, I can see gluon-nlp adding themselves to the Python3 statement. Once > the vote passes, one of us could submit a PR to add MXNet as well. > > [1] https://codeclimate.com/ > [2] > https://open.edx.org/blog/python-2-is-ending-we-need-to-move-to-python-3/ > > > On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 at 21:39, Kshitij Kalambarkar < > kshitijkalambar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > On Fri, Jul 19, 2019, 04:28 Pedro Larroy > > wrote: > > > > > Seems 3.6 is a reasonable choice. > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 2:15 PM Marco de Abreu < > marco.g.ab...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Looking at EOL is certainly a good idea! I think once we get closer > to > > > > deprecation, we can check adoption statistics to make a well-informed > > > > decision that gives us the most advantages without dropping the ball > > on a > > > > majority of users (or supporting a branch that is going EOL soon). A > > > survey > > > > from 2018 [1] determined the following distribution: > > > > 3.5: 11% > > > > 3.6: 54% > > > > 3.7: 30% > > > > > > > > Deprecation for 3.5 is scheduled for 2020-09-13 [2]. Deprecation for > > 3.6 > > > is > > > > scheduled for 2021-12-23 [2].Deprecation for 3.7 is scheduled > > > > for 2023-06-27 [2]. > > > > > > > > Following the trend, I'd say that it would be a decision between > Python > > > 3.6 > > > > and 3.7. Later on, I'd propose to check recent surveys and also have > a > > > > separate thread to determine if there's anything we're missing (e.g. > a > > > big > > > > company being unable to use Python 3.7). What do you think? > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Marco > > > > > > > > [1]: > https://www.jetbrains.com/research/python-developers-survey-2018/ > > > > [2]: https://devguide.python.org/#status-of-python-branches > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 9:42 PM Yuan Tang > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I would suggest supporting Python 3.5+ since the earlier versions > > have > > > > > reached end-of-life status: > > > > > https://devguide.python.org/devcycle/#end-of-life-branches > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 3:36 PM Pedro Larroy < > > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > This would simplify CI, reduce costs and more. I think a followup > > > > > > question is what would be the mininum Python3 version supported? > > > > > > Depending on that we might be able to use type annotations for > > > example > > > > > > or other features. > > > > > > > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 12:07 PM Yuan Tang < > > terrytangy...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 2:51 PM Yuxi Hu > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:31 AM Tong He < > hetong...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tong He > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jake Lee 于2019年7月18日周四 上午11:29写道： > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:27 AM Junru Shao < > > > > > > junrushao1...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:12 AM Anirudh Acharya < > > > > > > > > > anirudhk...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:03 AM Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > > > > > marco.g.ab...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Marco > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sheng Zha schrieb am Do., > 18. > > > Juli > > > > > > 2019, > > > > > > > > > > 19:59: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear MXNet community, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd like to reopen the discussion on deprecating > > > python2 > > > > > > > > support. > > > > > > > > > > > This > > > > > > > > > > > > > > would help modernize the design and engineering > > > practice > > > > > in > > > > > > > > MXNet > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > help > > > > > > > > > > > > > > improve speed and quality
Re: [Discuss] MXNet Python 2 Support Deprecation
+1 definitely. Going forward, MXNet repo as it stands has ~95,000+ lines of Python code [1] OpenEdx has a million (10x) LOC and this mammoth effort of porting from Python 2 to 3 is treated as a separate project named Incremental Improvement. [2] We can take inspiration from them and have a similar effort by calling action from the community. Issues can be maintained in a separate JIRA board to track high priority tasks. Also, I can see gluon-nlp adding themselves to the Python3 statement. Once the vote passes, one of us could submit a PR to add MXNet as well. [1] https://codeclimate.com/ [2] https://open.edx.org/blog/python-2-is-ending-we-need-to-move-to-python-3/ On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 at 21:39, Kshitij Kalambarkar < kshitijkalambar...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > > On Fri, Jul 19, 2019, 04:28 Pedro Larroy > wrote: > > > Seems 3.6 is a reasonable choice. > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 2:15 PM Marco de Abreu > > wrote: > > > > > > Looking at EOL is certainly a good idea! I think once we get closer to > > > deprecation, we can check adoption statistics to make a well-informed > > > decision that gives us the most advantages without dropping the ball > on a > > > majority of users (or supporting a branch that is going EOL soon). A > > survey > > > from 2018 [1] determined the following distribution: > > > 3.5: 11% > > > 3.6: 54% > > > 3.7: 30% > > > > > > Deprecation for 3.5 is scheduled for 2020-09-13 [2]. Deprecation for > 3.6 > > is > > > scheduled for 2021-12-23 [2].Deprecation for 3.7 is scheduled > > > for 2023-06-27 [2]. > > > > > > Following the trend, I'd say that it would be a decision between Python > > 3.6 > > > and 3.7. Later on, I'd propose to check recent surveys and also have a > > > separate thread to determine if there's anything we're missing (e.g. a > > big > > > company being unable to use Python 3.7). What do you think? > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Marco > > > > > > [1]: https://www.jetbrains.com/research/python-developers-survey-2018/ > > > [2]: https://devguide.python.org/#status-of-python-branches > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 9:42 PM Yuan Tang > > wrote: > > > > > > > I would suggest supporting Python 3.5+ since the earlier versions > have > > > > reached end-of-life status: > > > > https://devguide.python.org/devcycle/#end-of-life-branches > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 3:36 PM Pedro Larroy < > > pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > This would simplify CI, reduce costs and more. I think a followup > > > > > question is what would be the mininum Python3 version supported? > > > > > Depending on that we might be able to use type annotations for > > example > > > > > or other features. > > > > > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 12:07 PM Yuan Tang < > terrytangy...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 2:51 PM Yuxi Hu > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:31 AM Tong He > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tong He > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jake Lee 于2019年7月18日周四 上午11:29写道： > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:27 AM Junru Shao < > > > > > junrushao1...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:12 AM Anirudh Acharya < > > > > > > > > anirudhk...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:03 AM Marco de Abreu < > > > > > > > > > marco.g.ab...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Marco > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sheng Zha schrieb am Do., 18. > > Juli > > > > > 2019, > > > > > > > > > 19:59: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear MXNet community, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd like to reopen the discussion on deprecating > > python2 > > > > > > > support. > > > > > > > > > > This > > > > > > > > > > > > > would help modernize the design and engineering > > practice > > > > in > > > > > > > MXNet > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > help > > > > > > > > > > > > > improve speed and quality. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For this purpose, I reopened the issue on this > here: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/8703 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If the consensus is towards the direction of > dropping > > > > > python2 > > > > > > > > > > support, > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > > suggest we announce
