Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.5.0.rc1

2019-06-20 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
master, it is using 1.4.1. Anirudh On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 6:17 PM Lai Wei wrote: > Hi, > > Could you share which test failed and what’s the crash? How to reproduce > it? > > I was able to install sockeye and run all tests passed. Using > python setup.py test > > I h

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.5.0.rc1

2019-06-20 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
I was able to reproduce a crash with the commit 09202f7f261954383aa387144524d38f83f18d06 but not with the commit a862270beb2d796c1ba311183f7f4a766a18ad6c. Anirudh On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:53 PM Lai Wei wrote: > Hi Przemyslaw, > > Is there an issue with more details to track th

Re: CUDA / CUDNN support revisited

2019-06-18 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
are impacted by certain issues, we should just bump up the version and stop support for 10.0. Would like to hear more from Nvidia folks (on this particular case of CUDA 10.0 vs CUDA 10.1 and what are the recommendations for existing customers). Anirudh On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:21 PM Dick Carter wrote

Re: Making new operators and AMP lists

2019-05-30 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
ing default lists, and the later use case may be rare. Anirudh On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 3:25 PM Sheng Zha wrote: > Given that we're swtiching from the practice of failing the AMP related > test to warning, I intend to merge #15085 soon if no objection. > > -sz > > On 2019/05/30 19:

Re: Making new operators and AMP lists

2019-05-28 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
a long time before developer realizes that he has to do this, thats why I suggested we need to reduce the time it takes for him to realize that something was missed. Anirudh On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 4:57 PM Sheng Zha wrote: > This is driving people away exactly because they don't know this is wha

Re: Making new operators and AMP lists

2019-05-28 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
. Also, this will be very important once we move the feature out of contrib. Anirudh On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 3:52 PM Marco de Abreu wrote: > Hi, > > I'm generally in favour of these kind of tests since they make developers > aware of changes they have to make which they would usually

Re: Making new operators and AMP lists

2019-05-28 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
ught early at the statement "import mxnet". Thoughts? Anirudh On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:32 PM Przemysław Trędak wrote: > Dear Community, > > One of the recently merged features of the 1.5 release, AMP (Automatic > Mixed Precision) support (PR [1], design doc [5]), introduced a requirement

Re: [DISCUSS] 1.5.0 Release Plan

2019-05-15 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
Hi Lai, >From the discussion I had with Nvidia offline they are targeting on pushing the required changes today. Since this is important feature for the release, if this gets delayed and cannot be merged by 05/17/2019, the code freeze date may need to be changed. Anirudh On Wed, May 15, 2

Re: [Proposal] New operator graph for MXNet

2019-05-15 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
t to build a healthy community. Anirudh On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 12:03 AM Junru Shao wrote: > Hi Pedro, > > I really appreciate that a diligent and talented engineer eagerly wants to > improve our system, and am very thankful that you have done so much for our > community. However,

Re: Requesting slack access

2019-05-08 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
Sent invite! On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 6:43 AM Sem wrote: > Requesting slack access > >

Re: [DISCUSS] 1.5.0 Release Plan

2019-05-08 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
week, but reviews will take longer than May 17th. Anirudh On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 11:49 PM Sheng Zha wrote: > Hi, > > While 1.4.1 vote on general@incubator is still on going, I’d like to > propose that we start preparing 1.5.0 release. > > 1.5.0 will include changes that dates

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.1.rc0

2019-05-04 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
No worries, maybe its just something with my setup. Moving my vote to +0, pending someone else check. On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 11:39 PM Junru Shao wrote: > Hi Anirudh, > > Thanks for reporting this! > > I verified on my EC2 machine for the second time. It perfectly builds with

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.1.rc0

2019-05-03 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
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 i

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.1.rc0

2019-05-03 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
cs_Test::TestBody()': /home/ubuntu/experimentals/master_mxnet/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 retu

Re: Proposal for Conversion from FP32 to Mixed Precision Models

2019-04-30 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
Hi Tao, I covered in the doc that it is specifically about inference. I can add another section in FAQ to mention why INT8 quantization is not included. Anirudh On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 7:59 AM Lv, Tao A wrote: > Thank you Anirudh! I'm just a little surprised that when we talk about >

Re: Proposal for Conversion from FP32 to Mixed Precision Models

2019-04-30 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
passes. Anirudh On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 2:22 PM Anirudh Subramanian wrote: > Hi Zach, > > You raise an interesting point. Thank you for the pointer! > > Incorporating CSE pass comes with its own cost, and the advantage it > brings is to make the ReducePrecision nnvm pass more

Re: Proposal for Conversion from FP32 to Mixed Precision Models

2019-04-29 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
ing it. I will check to see if CSE pass can benefit other NNVM pass also like quantization pass apart from ReducePrecision, and will get back. Anirudh On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 11:18 AM Zach Kimberg wrote: > I have one suggestion. In the current design, there are the additional maps > from e

Re: Proposal for Conversion from FP32 to Mixed Precision Models

2019-04-29 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
usage. Also, when we move quantize_model APIs outside contrib we can consider adding them under AMP namespace. The challenge would then be to educate users on difference between "quantize" and "convert". Anirudh On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 7:45 AM Lv, Tao A wrote: > Thank

Re: Proposal for Conversion from FP32 to Mixed Precision Models

2019-04-29 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
o disk? Lets say users want to save converted mixed precision model used for inference to disk. It will save both, the symbol with the amp_cast and amp_multicast operators and the params (which are casted if necessary). Anirudh On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 6:55 AM Lv, Tao A wrote: > Thank you

Proposal for Conversion from FP32 to Mixed Precision Models

2019-04-29 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
Hi all, I have created a doc for conversion from FP32 to Mixed Precision Models: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Conversion+from+FP32+to+Mixed+Precision+Models I look forward to your feedback on the same. Thanks, Anirudh

[Announcement] New Committer - Wang Jiajun

2019-04-16 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93=is%3Aissue+involves%3Aarcadiaphy PRs authored: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93=is%3Apr+author%3Aarcadiaphy+ Anirudh

Re: Implementing zero-dim and zero-size tensors in MXNet and its impact on your codebases

2019-04-11 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
a frontend which is not yet merged to the repo but in its own repo, these repos should also be considered consumers of MXNet API. Anirudh On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 12:12 PM Marco de Abreu wrote: > Good point about the adoption speed for the different frontends, Anirudh. > While this is a quite

Re: Implementing zero-dim and zero-size tensors in MXNet and its impact on your codebases

2019-04-11 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
at their own pace. Anirudh On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 10:58 AM Jun Wu wrote: > I'm not sure about whether C APIs should fall under semver. This is the > discussion we would like to have with the community. > > My thinking on this: > 1. In most of the cases, C APIs only serve as

Re: Implementing zero-dim and zero-size tensors in MXNet and its impact on your codebases

2019-04-11 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
I was under the impression that C API does fall under semver. Has this been discussed somewhere before ? Is this also the case for C Predict API ? On Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 8:08 AM Marco de Abreu wrote: > In case only changes to the c-api are being made, it doesn't fall under our > semantic

Re: assimilation of mshadow into the MXNet codebase

2019-04-05 Thread Anirudh Acharya
://github.com/QuantStack/xtensor ) can also be a candidate here. - Anirudh On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 7:03 PM Pedro Larroy wrote: > Hi > > Some developers have noticed that working in mshadow is cumbersome as > it's a 3rdparty subrepo. > > Since mshadow is a bunch of headers whi

Re: Include R-package

2019-04-01 Thread Anirudh Acharya
There was a conversation on this some time back here - https://lists.apache.org/list.html?d...@mxnet.apache.org:2018-12:Rcpp%20licensing%20in%20Apache%20MXNet - Anirudh On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 12:19 PM Zach Kimberg wrote: > As part of the current MXNet release process, the R-pack

[Announcement] New Committer - Alex Zai

2019-03-31 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
-mxnet/pulls?page=1=is%3Apr+reviewed-by%3Aazai91=%E2%9C%93 Dev: https://lists.apache.org/list.html?d...@mxnet.apache.org:lte=3y:azai91 Thanks, Anirudh

Re: R help

2019-03-25 Thread Anirudh Acharya
Yes, that is the error, need to dig deeper why that URL is not working. Thanks Anirudh On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 10:40 AM kellen sunderland < kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Is this the error? > "test_model.R:129: error: Fine-tune > > cannot open URL > 'http://da

Re: R help

2019-03-25 Thread Anirudh Acharya
6.params '" Thanks Anirudh On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 7:34 AM Per da Silva wrote: > Dear community, > > I'm working on a PR <https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/14513> > to update CI GPU jobs to be based on CUDA v10. However, for some reason, > amongst oth

Re: [DISCUSS] Rebrand Gluon to MXNet imperative or something MXNet.

2019-03-22 Thread Anirudh Acharya
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.

[Announcement] New Committer - Patric Zhao

2019-03-14 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
ion+and+Quantization+based+on+subgraph+and+MKL-DNN> Thanks, Anirudh

HPO for MXNet models

2019-03-13 Thread Anirudh Acharya
some wiggle room there. MXNet needs HPO functionality and instead of building something from scratch we could just use existing open source projects. Would like to hear more from the community. Thanks Anirudh Acharya

Re: Call for Ideas and Approaches to Community Building

2019-03-06 Thread Anirudh Acharya
active PMC members. Just my 2 cents. Thanks Anirudh On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 7:10 AM Isabel Drost-Fromm wrote: > > > Am 2. März 2019 15:13:23 MEZ schrieb Carin Meier : > >I wanted to kickoff a discussion about community building. There was an > >excellent blog post from the

Re: [DISCUSS] Process to remove deprecated operators

2019-02-28 Thread Anirudh Acharya
into which these breaking changes get introduced, and this branch can later be merged into master prior to v2.0 release. Thanks Anirudh On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 1:35 PM Wen-Yang Chu wrote: > Hi, > > I have raised an issue: > > mx.nd.Crop does not support FP16 and decpreciate

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

2019-02-04 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
ease/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

Re: [Announcement] New Committer -- Lin Yuan

2019-02-03 Thread Anirudh Acharya
Congratulations Lin On Sat, Feb 2, 2019, 3:27 PM Tianqi Chen 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.

Re: [Question] UI change policy in MXNet

2018-12-20 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
On Thu, Dec 20, 2018, 1:56 PM Lin Yuan Hi Anirudh, > > Thanks a lot for your clarifications! I have some followup > questions/comments: > > 1) Which guideline should we follow when updating the UI in MXNet > operators? > A) MXNet follows semantic versioning, so breakin

Re: [Question] UI change policy in MXNet

2018-12-20 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
summarize: contrib was created for ops for which we provide limited guarantees with respect to backward compatibility, interface changes, testing etc. Anirudh On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 1:00 PM Lin Yuan wrote: > Dear Community, > > As a contributor, I would like to know the current pol

Re: [DISCUSS] About the PR merging policy

2018-12-14 Thread Anirudh Acharya
in good faith in most cases) on how many approvals to wait for before merging would be good. And having these in one place in the cwiki would be convenient. Thanks Anirudh On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 11:59 AM Carin Meier wrote: > Thanks Steffen, > > I had remembered reading that but

Re: v1.4.0 status 11/29

2018-12-03 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
Hi Steffen, I have created a PR to cherry pick the change to v1.4.x branch: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13517 Anirudh On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 11:29 AM Steffen Rochel wrote: > Thanks Haibin. Anirudh - please add PR for v1.4.x for > https://github.com/apache/incubator

Re: Rcpp licensing in Apache MXNet

2018-12-02 Thread Anirudh Acharya
once again before we do include it. Thanks Anirudh On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 3:22 PM Steffen Rochel wrote: > Hi KK - I'm going through the release checklist > < > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Release+Process#ReleaseProc

Re: Adding AMD CPU to CI

2018-11-29 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
for it. Anirudh On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 4:29 PM Marco de Abreu wrote: > I think it's worth a discussion to do a sanity check. While generally these > instructions are standardized, we also made the experience with ARM that > the theory and reality sometimes don't match. Thus, it's al

Re: Adding AMD CPU to CI

2018-11-29 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
+1 On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 2:38 PM Alex Zai wrote: > What are people's thoughts on having AMD machines tested on the CI? AMD > machines are now available on AWS. > > Best, > Alex >

Re: Include MKLDNN into default mxnet pip package

2018-11-27 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
if this is going to happen anytime soon (It would be nice if you can obtain some timeline from MKLDNN team on this). As long as the PIP still has two different packages for mkl and without mkl my vote is +1 for adding it as a default. Anirudh On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 5:04 AM Lv, Tao A wrote: > Hi Anir

Re: Include MKLDNN into default mxnet pip package

2018-11-26 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
it be possible to do a patch release for it or maintain a release branch for it ? Anirudh On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 5:03 PM Lv, Tao A wrote: > Hi Steffen, > > I think all the commits on MKL-DNN master branch are well tested for > MKL-DNN development team. If we really want to have a re

Re: CI impaired

2018-11-21 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
Thanks for the quick response and mitigation! On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 3:55 PM Marco de Abreu wrote: > Hello, > > today, CI had some issues and I had to cancel all jobs a few minutes ago. > This was basically caused by the high load that is currently being put on > our CI system due to the

Re: Splitting Jenkins pipelines - stop changes to Jenkinsfiles!

2018-11-21 Thread Anirudh
/17/pipeline Anirudh On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 9:31 AM Marco de Abreu wrote: > Please notice that the "continuous-integration/jenkins/pr-merge" currently > is overlapping with the new pipelines. Please make sure all checks pass > (also the non-required ones) before merging t

Re: A New API for creating .rec files

2018-11-21 Thread Anirudh Acharya
Hi All, Sorry for the delay, but here is the design spec for the API - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Image+Transforms+and+RecordIO+file+Creation Look forward to feedback from the community. Regards Anirudh On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 2:15 PM kellen sunderland < kellen.sund

Re: [Question] Difference between "Feature" and "Feature request" labels in Github

2018-11-13 Thread Acharya, Anirudh
Thanks for doing this. - Anirudh On Nov 13, 2018 5:25 PM, Sheng Zha wrote: Oh, I see. I was moving the other 80 or so, so it was probably a race-condition. Anyway, thanks for being eager to help. -sz On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 5:24 PM Naveen Swamy wrote: > done now, removed the feature la

Re: [Question] Difference between "Feature" and "Feature request" labels in Github

2018-11-13 Thread Anirudh Acharya
This issue was raised before here - https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3e988e6bd82cb2d69ba20c21bf763952ed22a5732e61f6fba1f89ac8@%3Cdev.mxnet.apache.org%3E We need someone with committer privileges to fix it. Thanks Anirudh On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 4:36 PM Lin Yuan wrote: > Dear Commun

Re: Nightly/Weekly tests for examples

2018-11-12 Thread Anirudh Acharya
features. I am curious to know how you will write tests for these things. Looking forward to seeing the design of this test bed/framework. Thanks Anirudh Acharya On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 2:39 PM Marco de Abreu wrote: > Hello Ankit, > > that's a great idea! Using the tutorial tests as

Re: Run Sphinx checks on MXNet CI

2018-11-11 Thread Anirudh Acharya
Thanks for the reply Aaron. Once the existing Sphinx errors are fixed and codebase is cleaned up, lets definitely revisit this and try to add a Sphinx build into the CI pipeline so that we can prevent MXNet documentation from breaking. Thanks Anirudh On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 5:16 PM Aaron Markham

Re: Map OpenCV assertions to mxnet::Error

2018-11-08 Thread Anirudh
to have a mapping of error codes from backend to frontend to communicate what kind of exception it is. 2. Handling of std::exception. Anirudh On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 2:54 AM Lieven Govaerts wrote: > Hi MXNet devs, > > > I'd like some feedback on the following proposal before I start &g

Run Sphinx checks on MXNet CI

2018-11-08 Thread Anirudh Acharya
to the CI? Regards Anirudh Acharya

Re: MXNet - Label Bot functionality

2018-11-01 Thread Anirudh Acharya
strangers on the internet. 2. Also you seem to have linked a document that goes to an internal amazon website, please remove that. [image: Screen Shot 2018-11-01 at 2.31.13 PM.png] Thanks Anirudh On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 1:51 PM Harsh Patel wrote: > Hey, > After having my PR

Re: [Discussion] Recognise Reviewers, Besides Committers and PMC

2018-10-23 Thread Anirudh
ually find the reviews from non-committer super helpful, and they > >> >> help the committer to catch problems that are otherwise overlooked. > >> >> > >> >> However, it is very hard to get contributors to do code reviews > unless > >> we >

Re: [Discussion] Recognise Reviewers, Besides Committers and PMC

2018-10-22 Thread Anirudh
and committers). Anirudh On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 8:28 AM Qing Lan wrote: > +1 > Let's have a reviewer list somewhere with a certain format: such as C++, > Gluon, Scala/Java based on language or some other category. etc. In the > future, label bot would automatically assign reviewers based

A New API for creating .rec files

2018-09-25 Thread Anirudh Acharya
this functionality from the PyPi package itself, instead of cloning the repo. I was thinking of converting the tool into an API call under the mx.io package. I will send the API design shortly. I wanted to know what the community thinks of this change. Thanks Anirudh Acharya

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 1.3.0.RC0

2018-09-06 Thread Anirudh
-1 Considering that using fp16 with gluon is much easier than the alternative where you need access to the model code, this fix is really useful. I understand the pain of doing mxnet release and appreciate Roshani and Shengs efforts, but this seems like something we should fix. On Thu, Sep 6,

Re: Propose to discontinue supporting Apache MXNet on Windows 7

2018-08-28 Thread Anirudh Acharya
+1 for discontinuing. On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 4:11 PM Naveen Swamy wrote: > +1 to stop supporting Win7 > > On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 3:54 PM Lin Yuan wrote: > > > Dear Community, > > > > > > > > Currently, our MXNet installation guide for Windows does not work for > > Windows 7. e.g. Microsoft

Re: Duplication of Operators for sampling from random distributions

2018-07-24 Thread Anirudh Acharya
Thank for the reply and the clarification, Haibin. On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 2:31 PM Haibin Lin wrote: > Hi Anirudh, > > Thanks for asking this on dev@. I looked at the doc for sample_uniform and > random_uniform, and found that the API is different. For sample_uniform, > the ty

Re: Publish MXNet images to DockerHub

2018-07-24 Thread Anirudh Acharya
ith TensorRT enabled, would it > be possible to get that image pushed to the MXNet Dockerhub repo by a > committer? > > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 3:57 PM Anirudh Acharya > wrote: > > > @Naveen No, I meant in general, for all bindings. Irrespective of whether > > we use a p

Duplication of Operators for sampling from random distributions

2018-07-23 Thread Anirudh Acharya
distributions, but the behavior of the operators is not different. Is sample_op.cc being retained for legacy reasons or backward compatibility? Can it be deprecated or EOLed? Correct me if I am wrong here. Thanks Anirudh

Re: Publish MXNet images to DockerHub

2018-07-22 Thread Anirudh Acharya
sunderland < kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think it's a good idea Anirudh. It should help users easily get MXNet up > and running whether they're running services, following tutorials, etc. > > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 8:10 AM Naveen Swamy wrote: > > > I

Re: Publish MXNet images to DockerHub

2018-07-21 Thread Anirudh Acharya
Yes, correct cu90 is indeed there, thanks for pointing it. So the question, should we be publishing to Docker Hub as part of the release process so that bindings other than python are also published and there is a policy on what cuda versions we publish? Thanks ANirudh On Sat, Jul 21, 2018

Re: Publish MXNet images to DockerHub

2018-07-21 Thread Anirudh Acharya
The python binding that is actively maintained is mxnet-mkl 1.2.1 Other versions that use CUDA like mxnet-cu and mxnet-cumkl are not actively maintained. - Anirudh On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 9:09 PM Mu Li wrote: > Surprisingly only the python binding is actively maintained. I remem

Publish MXNet images to DockerHub

2018-07-21 Thread Anirudh Acharya
of use and access to our users. Is this something that should be included as part of the release process? What does the community think? Thanks Anirudh Acharya

[ANNOUNCE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.1 Release

2018-07-20 Thread Anirudh Subramanian
Hello all, The Apache MXNet (incubating) Community announces the availability of Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.1! Apache MXNet (incubating) is a deep learning framework designed for both efficiency and flexibility. It allows you to mix symbolic and imperative programming to maximize efficiency

Re: Release plan - MXNET 1.3

2018-07-19 Thread Anirudh Acharya
@sandeep krishnamurthy the bug fixes in the R-package is something we have just begun, there will not be anything significant to announce before the v1.3 code freeze. On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:08 PM Steffen Rochel wrote: > To make it easier to find the discussions related to project proposals

Re: [VOTE] Subscribe dev@ to Github Activities

2018-07-17 Thread Anirudh Acharya
+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 al

Re: [VOTE] Subscribe dev@ to Github Activities

2018-07-17 Thread Anirudh
and it is redundant for most purposes. Anirudh On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 9:26 AM, Sheng Zha wrote: > 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 >

Re: [DISCUSS] Subscribe dev@ to Github Activities?

2018-07-12 Thread Anirudh Acharya
For concerns regarding signal and noise, I think we can get around that by setting up the right kind of filters in the mail client. Signal and Noise can be different for different people. Regards, Anirudh On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 3:34 PM Haibin Lin wrote: > Agree. +1 for more transpare

Re: [DISCUSS] Subscribe dev@ to Github Activities?

2018-07-12 Thread Anirudh Acharya
+1 On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 11:51 AM Piyush Ghai wrote: > +1 > > On Jul 12, 2018, at 11:50 AM, Tianqi Chen > wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 11:10 AM, Sheng Zha wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Should we subscribe dev list to github updates on mxnet repo? Both > github > >>

Re: C++ api issue labeling

2018-07-10 Thread Anirudh Acharya
een these two labels. It would make sense to merge the "Feature" label into "Feature Request". Thanks Anirudh On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 3:50 PM Hagay Lupesko wrote: > Thank you everyone for your suggestions. > I will work with a committer to get this updated ASAP. >

Re: Regarding 1.2.1 Release

2018-07-03 Thread Anirudh
@ or summarized the discussion and sought more opinions from the community on dev@. I ask mentors and community members to suggest any areas of improvement we can incorporate in such situations to minimize the time spent by community. Thanks, Anirudh On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 8:21 PM, Sergio

Re: Release process for R

2018-07-03 Thread Anirudh Acharya
way to access the R API. Thanks Anirudh On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 2:48 AM Marco de Abreu wrote: > Hello, > > do we have a release process for our R frontend? I noticed the issue at [1] > and it seems like we're only publishing to an S3 bucket which is not under > Apache. Is there

Regarding 1.2.1 Release

2018-07-02 Thread Anirudh
Hi all, After an offline discussion, the current decision is to block the 1.2.1 release, improve the warning message for save_params usage here: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11532 , cut a new RC and then restart the voting process. Anirudh

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 1.2.1.RC0 (Patch Release)

2018-06-28 Thread Anirudh
Hi, I have opened a PR for adding new content to 1.2.1 release notes: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11478 Please help review. Once this PR is approved I will be cutting the release. Thanks, Anirudh On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 7:10 PM, Chris Olivier wrote: > +1 > > On Tu

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 1.2.1.RC0 (Patch Release)

2018-06-26 Thread Anirudh
f you have any thoughts, questions or suggestions. Anirudh On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Anirudh wrote: > > Hi Mu, > > Thanks for bringing this up and hopefully this should answer Sheng's > question. > Thomas pointed out something similar in the PR here for the warning >

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 1.2.1.RC0 (Patch Release)

2018-06-25 Thread Anirudh
Hi, 1.2.1 (load_params) is backward compatible with 1.1.0 not with 1.2.0. It does not adhere exactly with semver but it had to be made, to quickly help our customers who were using the APIs incorrectly. Anirudh On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 5:42 PM, Sheng Zha wrote: > save_parameters didn't ex

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 1.2.1.RC0 (Patch Release)

2018-06-25 Thread Anirudh
Hi Mu, The warining currently printed is "save_params is deprecated. Please use save_parameters." Isn't this similar to what you are suggesting ? Anirudh On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 3:47 PM, Mu Li wrote: > v1.2.1 will print a deprecating warning message when calling > save_params

Re: [RELEASE][VOTE] Release MXNet version 1.2.1.RC0

2018-06-22 Thread Anirudh
Does PMC in this page mean IPMC : https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes ? Also, does this mean we need three IPMC votes to pass this release on dev list ? Anirudh On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 9:15 PM, Sergio Fernández wrote: > Just wanted to refresh what >

[RELEASE][VOTE] Release MXNet version 1.2.1.RC0

2018-06-22 Thread Anirudh
Hi all, Apologies for replying instead of sending out a new email. This vote has passed with 6 +1s: Binding: Sandeep Haibin Indhu Non Binding: Carin Pedro Lai I will proceed with the vote on general@. Thanks, Anirudh

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 1.2.1.RC0 (Patch Release)

2018-06-22 Thread Anirudh
Hi all, Thanks a lot for checking the release. This vote has passed with: 6 +1s Binding: Sandeep Haibin Indhu Non Binding: Carin Pedro Lai Anirudh On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 8:00 AM, sandeep krishnamurthy < sandeep.krishn...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > > Lai (https://gi

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 1.2.1.RC0 (Patch Release)

2018-06-22 Thread Anirudh
Hi all, Thanks for checking the release. We need one more binding +1. I would request committers to help out here so that we can get the vote started on general@. Anirudh On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 3:06 PM, Pedro Larroy wrote: > I already changed my vote to +1 I don't think this a big is

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 1.2.1.RC0 (Patch Release)

2018-06-21 Thread Anirudh
bin Lin > wrote: > > > +1 > > > > Built from source with CUDA on Ubuntu. > > > > Ran example/gluon/word_language_model/train.py > > > > Best, > > Haibin > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 11:08 AM, Anirudh wrote: > > > >

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 1.2.1.RC0 (Patch Release)

2018-06-21 Thread Anirudh
Hi Pedro, I have seen this with the DEBUG flag on, not without it. I opened an issue here some time back: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/10856 Anirudh On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Pedro Larroy wrote: > Got it. Sorry to bring this up, and the deja-vu :-) . Makes se

Re: C++ api issue labeling

2018-06-21 Thread Anirudh
:). Anirudh On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Hagay Lupesko wrote: > Hey community, > > I was going over the open GitHub issues for MXNet, and noticed that we have > two labels for the CPP API: "CPP package", "C++" > > Wanted to suggest we rem

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 1.2.1.RC0 (Patch Release)

2018-06-21 Thread Anirudh
missed reviewing all the known issue of 1.2.0 and add it to 1.2.1 release notes. I will do that now. Anirudh On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 10:42 AM, Pedro Larroy wrote: > I think I have fixed this before, I will check if the patch didn't make it > to the branch. > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 10:

Re: [VOTE] Release MXNet version 1.2.1.RC0 (Patch Release)

2018-06-20 Thread Anirudh
Hi all, Please help with the testing and voting for 1.2.1 release. Anirudh On Mon, Jun 18, 2018, 6:52 PM Anirudh wrote: > Hi, > > This is the vote to release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.2.1. > Voting will start now and close Thursday June 21st 7:00 PM PDT. > &g

[VOTE] Release MXNet version 1.2.1.RC0 (Patch Release)

2018-06-18 Thread Anirudh
://mxnet.incubator.apache.org/install/index.html (Note: The README.md points to the 1.2.1 tag and does not work at the moment). Please remember to test first before voting accordingly. +1 = approve +0 = no opinion -1 = disapprove (provide reason) Anirudh

Re: Update on 1.2.1 release

2018-06-18 Thread Anirudh
Hi all, Since there are some issues with publishing scala package to maven, the 1.2.1 vote doesn't have to be blocked for the Scala package release. I will create the vote for 1.2.1.rc0 soon. Anirudh On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 1:27 PM, Anirudh wrote: > Hi Sina, > > RC is available he

Re: Update on 1.2.1 release

2018-06-18 Thread Anirudh
Hi Sina, RC is available here: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/releases/tag/1.2.1.rc0 . We are waiting to publish scala package to maven before we start the vote. Naveen, Qing and Andrew are working on this. Anirudh On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 1:18 PM, Afrooze, Sina wrote: > J

Re: Config for Scala Maven Package

2018-06-18 Thread Anirudh
big python user base getting the release early for the scala user base. Anirudh On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 7:27 AM, Naveen Swamy wrote: > All, I have created a guide to maven publish process here; > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/ > MXNet-Scala+Release+Process > . >

Re: Reverting pull request

2018-06-15 Thread Anirudh
the rules which we set for other contributors. If the argument is that users depend on the change since it has been introduced a few days ago, then the assumption with depending on the master is always that it is bleeding edge and things can break. Anirudh On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 3:10 PM, Mu

Re: Update on 1.2.1 release

2018-06-14 Thread Anirudh
Hi all, We have one last PR before code freeze: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/11298 Anirudh On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 11:46 AM, Anirudh wrote: > Waiting on CI for the PRs: #11236, #11210, #11267 > > Other PRs have been merged. > > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 10

Re: Update on 1.2.1 release

2018-06-14 Thread Anirudh
Waiting on CI for the PRs: #11236, #11210, #11267 Other PRs have been merged. On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 10:50 PM, Anirudh wrote: > Thanks Tao! Yes, this shouldn't be a blocker for 1.2.1. > > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 10:46 PM, Lv, Tao A wrote: > >> >> Yes, #10311 is onl

Re: Update on 1.2.1 release

2018-06-13 Thread Anirudh
.1 release > > On windows tests a segfault is indicated by "If -764728474728". I have > also seen it happen on Ubuntu, there are probably some links in the issue > (on my phone right now). > > Anirudh schrieb am Mi., 13. Juni 2018, 22:16: > > > By segfaulting test do y

Re: Update on 1.2.1 release

2018-06-13 Thread Anirudh
By segfaulting test do you mean : test_gru_bidirectional. I don't see the segfault in the logs. Can you point me to the test. Also, this seems to be specific to the master and not in 1.2: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/10311 Anirudh On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 10:00 PM, Marco de

Re: Update on 1.2.1 release

2018-06-13 Thread Anirudh
breaking on windows: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/11265 Anirudh On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 11:59 AM, Anirudh wrote: > Hi all, > > Here are the PRs that are being tracked for 1.2.1 release: > > Related to the save_params backwards incompatible change: #11127 (In >

  1   2   >