Re: dmlc packages into 3rdpary

[Hen]

Before the next release we need some kind of "this isn't Apache code" so
the reviewers can treat it accordingly. Putting in third-party/ works for
me.

I suspect it will remain controversial; but at least the focus will be in
the right way.

Hen

On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 11:43 AM, Chris Olivier 
wrote:

> Is the general consensus to move the dmlc packages into 3rdparty?
>
> If so, I can submit a PR that does this.
>
> I have no strong opinion on it either way and am very open to other
> opinions on this.
>
> -Chris
>

Re: dmlc packages into 3rdpary

[Zha, Sheng]

Some existing release pipelines may rely on the folder structure for caching, 
so this needs to be coordinated.

Best regards,
-sz

On 1/19/18, 11:51 AM, "Tianqi Chen"  wrote:

I think it is fine either way as it won’t affect the build status of the
projects.

Tianqi
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 11:43 AM Chris Olivier 
wrote:

> Is the general consensus to move the dmlc packages into 3rdparty?
>
> If so, I can submit a PR that does this.
>
> I have no strong opinion on it either way and am very open to other
> opinions on this.
>
> -Chris
>

Re: dmlc packages into 3rdpary

[Tianqi Chen]

I think it is fine either way as it won’t affect the build status of the
projects.

Tianqi
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 11:43 AM Chris Olivier 
wrote:

> Is the general consensus to move the dmlc packages into 3rdparty?
>
> If so, I can submit a PR that does this.
>
> I have no strong opinion on it either way and am very open to other
> opinions on this.
>
> -Chris
>