Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[kellen sunderland]

Will do.  Thanks for getting it in Tao.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019, 2:14 AM Lv, Tao A  Hi Steffen, thank you for the patience. #13905 passed the review and is
> merged now.
>
> Hi Kellen, please also keep an eye on the corresponding changes on master
> branch.
>
> -tao
>
> -Original Message-
> From: kellen sunderland [mailto:kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2019 7:34 AM
> To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
>
> Hey Steffen, thanks for allowing a little extra time to merge PRs.  All my
> PRs are in.  #13905 looks good to me, but we may want someone a little more
> familiar to MKLDNN / the ndarray.h file review as well.
>
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 11:53 AM Steffen Rochel 
> wrote:
>
> > Still waiting for merge of
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13905
> >
> > All other PR are merged and CI tests are passing. Please no more
> > changes on 1.4.x branch beside merge for PR 13905, so we can move
> > forward with 1.4.0 release.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Steffen
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 9:48 AM Steffen Rochel
> > 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear MXNet community -
> > > thanks for merging previously agreed PR's into v1.4.x branch.
> > >
> > > Kellen and Zhennan - what is the ETA for
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13905 ? Please try to
> > > merge today.
> > >
> > > Yuxi asked offline to merge
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13922 to complete
> > > Horovod integration. PR will be merged today.
> > >
> > > After above PR are merge and CI passed successfully 1.4.0.rc1 will
> > > be created and voting started.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Steffen
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 2:34 PM kellen sunderland <
> > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Sounds good Steffen.  I believe most of these PRs only fix
> > >> functional problems (they don't add features) and should be fairly
> low risk.
> > >>
> > >> Update from my side:
> > >> 13695: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13899 <-
> > >> Already merged, thanks Haibin!
> > >>
> > >> Ready for review / merge with all tests passed:
> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13898
> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13900
> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13897
> > >>
> > >> -Kellen
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:06 PM Steffen Rochel <
> > steffenroc...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Kellen - thanks, please go ahead. I'm ok as long we avoid risky
> > >> > PR and
> > >> can
> > >> > get to a stable and tested build by Friday.
> > >> >
> > >> > Best,
> > >> > Steffen
> > >> >
> > >> > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 9:48 PM kellen sunderland <
> > >> > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Many thanks for the license fixes and allowing some other PRs
> > >> > > to
> > come
> > >> > into
> > >> > > the release.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > For #13697 I've contacted the author Zhennan and let him know
> > >> > > he can
> > >> cut
> > >> > a
> > >> > > branch to v1.4.x to update any APIs that are required.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > For the other PRs listed here's some new PRs for the v1.4.x
> branch.
> > >> > > 13188: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13898
> > >> > > 13727: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13900
> > >> > > 13695: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13899 <-
> > >> Already
> > >> > > merged, thanks Haibin!
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I'd also propose that we include this TensorRT PR which fixes
> > >> inference
> > >> > > bugs and updates to a more stable commit of onnx-trt:
> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13897
> > >> > >
> > >> > > -Kellen
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 

RE: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Lv, Tao A]

Hi Steffen, thank you for the patience. #13905 passed the review and is merged 
now. 

Hi Kellen, please also keep an eye on the corresponding changes on master 
branch. 

-tao

-Original Message-
From: kellen sunderland [mailto:kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2019 7:34 AM
To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

Hey Steffen, thanks for allowing a little extra time to merge PRs.  All my PRs 
are in.  #13905 looks good to me, but we may want someone a little more 
familiar to MKLDNN / the ndarray.h file review as well.

On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 11:53 AM Steffen Rochel 
wrote:

> Still waiting for merge of
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13905
>
> All other PR are merged and CI tests are passing. Please no more 
> changes on 1.4.x branch beside merge for PR 13905, so we can move 
> forward with 1.4.0 release.
>
> Best Regards,
> Steffen
>
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 9:48 AM Steffen Rochel 
> 
> wrote:
>
> > Dear MXNet community -
> > thanks for merging previously agreed PR's into v1.4.x branch.
> >
> > Kellen and Zhennan - what is the ETA for
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13905 ? Please try to 
> > merge today.
> >
> > Yuxi asked offline to merge
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13922 to complete 
> > Horovod integration. PR will be merged today.
> >
> > After above PR are merge and CI passed successfully 1.4.0.rc1 will 
> > be created and voting started.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Steffen
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 2:34 PM kellen sunderland < 
> > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Sounds good Steffen.  I believe most of these PRs only fix 
> >> functional problems (they don't add features) and should be fairly low 
> >> risk.
> >>
> >> Update from my side:
> >> 13695: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13899 <- 
> >> Already merged, thanks Haibin!
> >>
> >> Ready for review / merge with all tests passed:
> >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13898
> >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13900
> >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13897
> >>
> >> -Kellen
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:06 PM Steffen Rochel <
> steffenroc...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Kellen - thanks, please go ahead. I'm ok as long we avoid risky 
> >> > PR and
> >> can
> >> > get to a stable and tested build by Friday.
> >> >
> >> > Best,
> >> > Steffen
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 9:48 PM kellen sunderland < 
> >> > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Many thanks for the license fixes and allowing some other PRs 
> >> > > to
> come
> >> > into
> >> > > the release.
> >> > >
> >> > > For #13697 I've contacted the author Zhennan and let him know 
> >> > > he can
> >> cut
> >> > a
> >> > > branch to v1.4.x to update any APIs that are required.
> >> > >
> >> > > For the other PRs listed here's some new PRs for the v1.4.x branch.
> >> > > 13188: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13898
> >> > > 13727: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13900
> >> > > 13695: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13899 <-
> >> Already
> >> > > merged, thanks Haibin!
> >> > >
> >> > > I'd also propose that we include this TensorRT PR which fixes
> >> inference
> >> > > bugs and updates to a more stable commit of onnx-trt:
> >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13897
> >> > >
> >> > > -Kellen
> >> > >
> >> > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 5:57 PM Steffen Rochel <
> >> steffenroc...@gmail.com>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Hi Lin - please go ahead to integrate into 1.4.x.
> >> > > > Steffen
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:17 PM Lin Yuan 
> >> > > > 
> >> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > Hi Steffen,
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > I would like to ask to include one more PR for 1.4.0.rc1:
> >

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[kellen sunderland]

s,
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Lin
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 2:24 PM Steffen Rochel <
> >> > > steffenroc...@gmail.com>
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > Dear MXNet community -
> >> > > > > > Zach & friends made good progress resolving the licensing
> >> issues.
> >> > One
> >> > > > > more
> >> > > > > > PR on 1.4.x branch is expected today.
> >> > > > > > The code freeze for 1.4.0.rc1 is Thursday Jan 17th 6pm PST.
> >> > > > > > I'm asking the requester to add following PR to 1.4.x branch:
> >> > > > > > Tao:
> >> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13882
> >> > > > > > Kellen:
> >> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13697
> >> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13188
> >> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13727
> >> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13695
> >> > > > > > Pedro:
> >> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13535
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > If there are additional PR to be considered for 1.4.0.rc1
> please
> >> > send
> >> > > > > > request to dev@.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Regards,
> >> > > > > > Steffen
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 11:28 AM Qing Lan  >
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Hi all,
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > I added a section F in the document that explained the
> current
> >> > > > > > > static-linked dependencies we used for official release. As
> >> there
> >> > > > are a
> >> > > > > > few
> >> > > > > > > licenses are under BSD3 and GPL, we need to handle them in
> our
> >> > next
> >> > > > > > > release. Please take a look and leave any concerns you may
> >> have.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Thanks,
> >> > > > > > > Qing
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > On 1/7/19, 8:33 PM, "kellen sunderland" <
> >> > > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com>
> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > So I see two quick options that should cut down on the
> >> > > dependency
> >> > > > > > > licenses
> >> > > > > > > required for TRT in the source release.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > 1: We can simply remove in the release package the
> >> submodules
> >> > > for
> >> > > > > > onnx
> >> > > > > > > in
> >> > > > > > > folder
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > incubator-mxnet/3rdparty/onnx-tensorrt/third_party/onnx/third_party.
> >> > > > > > > None of those dependencies are used in the build (I've
> >> just
> >> > > > > verified
> >> > > > > > > locally on my machine).
> >> > > > > > > 2: We can make a cmake based checkout system and ensure
> we
> >> > only
> >> > > > > > > checkout
> >> > > > > > > the required files when TRT builds are enabled (similar
> to
> >> > the
> >> > > > > > current
> >> > > > > > > mkl-ml setup).
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > I'd suggest option 1 for this release, and that we
> support
> >> > > > option 2
> >> > > > > > > for the
> >> &

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Steffen Rochel]

gt; > > > Tao:
>> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13882
>> > > > > > Kellen:
>> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13697
>> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13188
>> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13727
>> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13695
>> > > > > > Pedro:
>> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13535
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > If there are additional PR to be considered for 1.4.0.rc1 please
>> > send
>> > > > > > request to dev@.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Regards,
>> > > > > > Steffen
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 11:28 AM Qing Lan 
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Hi all,
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I added a section F in the document that explained the current
>> > > > > > > static-linked dependencies we used for official release. As
>> there
>> > > > are a
>> > > > > > few
>> > > > > > > licenses are under BSD3 and GPL, we need to handle them in our
>> > next
>> > > > > > > release. Please take a look and leave any concerns you may
>> have.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Thanks,
>> > > > > > > Qing
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On 1/7/19, 8:33 PM, "kellen sunderland" <
>> > > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > So I see two quick options that should cut down on the
>> > > dependency
>> > > > > > > licenses
>> > > > > > > required for TRT in the source release.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > 1: We can simply remove in the release package the
>> submodules
>> > > for
>> > > > > > onnx
>> > > > > > > in
>> > > > > > > folder
>> > > > > > >
>> > > incubator-mxnet/3rdparty/onnx-tensorrt/third_party/onnx/third_party.
>> > > > > > > None of those dependencies are used in the build (I've
>> just
>> > > > > verified
>> > > > > > > locally on my machine).
>> > > > > > > 2: We can make a cmake based checkout system and ensure we
>> > only
>> > > > > > > checkout
>> > > > > > > the required files when TRT builds are enabled (similar to
>> > the
>> > > > > > current
>> > > > > > > mkl-ml setup).
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I'd suggest option 1 for this release, and that we support
>> > > > option 2
>> > > > > > > for the
>> > > > > > > 1.5 release.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:19 PM Lv, Tao A <
>> tao.a...@intel.com
>> > >
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > What should I do for the double headers in
>> > > > > > > 3rdparty/mkldnn/src/cpu/xbyak/?
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > -tao
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > -Original Message-
>> > > > > > > > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
>> > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 10:51 AM
>> > > > > > > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Kellen and Tao -
>> > > > > > > > yes, the understanding is that dependencies need to be
>> > > > considered
>> > > > > > > and all

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Steffen Rochel]

 > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > Steffen
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 11:28 AM Qing Lan 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I added a section F in the document that explained the current
> > > > > > > static-linked dependencies we used for official release. As
> there
> > > > are a
> > > > > > few
> > > > > > > licenses are under BSD3 and GPL, we need to handle them in our
> > next
> > > > > > > release. Please take a look and leave any concerns you may
> have.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Qing
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 1/7/19, 8:33 PM, "kellen sunderland" <
> > > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >     So I see two quick options that should cut down on the
> > > dependency
> > > > > > > licenses
> > > > > > > required for TRT in the source release.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1: We can simply remove in the release package the
> submodules
> > > for
> > > > > > onnx
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > folder
> > > > > > >
> > > incubator-mxnet/3rdparty/onnx-tensorrt/third_party/onnx/third_party.
> > > > > > > None of those dependencies are used in the build (I've just
> > > > > verified
> > > > > > > locally on my machine).
> > > > > > > 2: We can make a cmake based checkout system and ensure we
> > only
> > > > > > > checkout
> > > > > > > the required files when TRT builds are enabled (similar to
> > the
> > > > > > current
> > > > > > > mkl-ml setup).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'd suggest option 1 for this release, and that we support
> > > > option 2
> > > > > > > for the
> > > > > > > 1.5 release.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:19 PM Lv, Tao A <
> tao.a...@intel.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What should I do for the double headers in
> > > > > > > 3rdparty/mkldnn/src/cpu/xbyak/?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -tao
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > > > > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
> > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 10:51 AM
> > > > > > > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Kellen and Tao -
> > > > > > > > yes, the understanding is that dependencies need to be
> > > > considered
> > > > > > > and all
> > > > > > > > licences referenced to include in top level LICENSE file.
> > > > > > > > Appreciate your help with it.
> > > > > > > > Steffen
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:39 PM kellen sunderland <
> > > > > > > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Sorry to hear about the licensing issues.  I was
> > following
> > > > the
> > > > > > > general
> > > > > > > > > vote but I'm still lacking some clarity around what
> > > licenses
> > > > in
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > onnx-trt repo need to be surfaced.  I believe onnx-trt
> is
> > > MIT
> > > > > > > > > licensed, but it includes Onnx as a third party repo
> > 

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[kellen sunderland]

 > So I see two quick options that should cut down on the
> > dependency
> > > > > > licenses
> > > > > > required for TRT in the source release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1: We can simply remove in the release package the submodules
> > for
> > > > > onnx
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > folder
> > > > > >
> > incubator-mxnet/3rdparty/onnx-tensorrt/third_party/onnx/third_party.
> > > > > > None of those dependencies are used in the build (I've just
> > > > verified
> > > > > > locally on my machine).
> > > > > > 2: We can make a cmake based checkout system and ensure we
> only
> > > > > > checkout
> > > > > > the required files when TRT builds are enabled (similar to
> the
> > > > > current
> > > > > > mkl-ml setup).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'd suggest option 1 for this release, and that we support
> > > option 2
> > > > > > for the
> > > > > > 1.5 release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:19 PM Lv, Tao A  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > What should I do for the double headers in
> > > > > > 3rdparty/mkldnn/src/cpu/xbyak/?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -tao
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > > > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
> > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 10:51 AM
> > > > > > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kellen and Tao -
> > > > > > > yes, the understanding is that dependencies need to be
> > > considered
> > > > > > and all
> > > > > > > licences referenced to include in top level LICENSE file.
> > > > > > > Appreciate your help with it.
> > > > > > > Steffen
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:39 PM kellen sunderland <
> > > > > > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Sorry to hear about the licensing issues.  I was
> following
> > > the
> > > > > > general
> > > > > > > > vote but I'm still lacking some clarity around what
> > licenses
> > > in
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > onnx-trt repo need to be surfaced.  I believe onnx-trt is
> > MIT
> > > > > > > > licensed, but it includes Onnx as a third party repo
> which
> > > then
> > > > > > brings
> > > > > > > > in dependencies with a variety of licenses.  The proposal
> > is
> > > > that
> > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > look at these on an individual basis and then add them to
> > our
> > > > top
> > > > > > level
> > > > > > > LICENSE file right?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > An alternative is that we may be able to checkout a
> smaller
> > > > > source
> > > > > > > > code dependency tree if we remove a few unneeded ONNX's
> > > > > > dependencies
> > > > > > > > (pybind and google-bench).  My hope is that this wouldn't
> > > > affect
> > > > > > our
> > > > > > > > compilation process and would get us down to two licenses
> > to
> > > > > report
> > > > > > > > (just Onnx and Onnx-TRT, both MIT).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:07 PM Meghna Baijal
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > > > For some more context, these were the

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Steffen Rochel]

Kellen - thanks, please go ahead. I'm ok as long we avoid risky PR and can
get to a stable and tested build by Friday.

Best,
Steffen

On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 9:48 PM kellen sunderland <
kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Many thanks for the license fixes and allowing some other PRs to come into
> the release.
>
> For #13697 I've contacted the author Zhennan and let him know he can cut a
> branch to v1.4.x to update any APIs that are required.
>
> For the other PRs listed here's some new PRs for the v1.4.x branch.
> 13188: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13898
> 13727: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13900
> 13695: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13899 <- Already
> merged, thanks Haibin!
>
> I'd also propose that we include this TensorRT PR which fixes inference
> bugs and updates to a more stable commit of onnx-trt:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13897
>
> -Kellen
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 5:57 PM Steffen Rochel 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Lin - please go ahead to integrate into 1.4.x.
> > Steffen
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:17 PM Lin Yuan  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Steffen,
> > >
> > > I would like to ask to include one more PR for 1.4.0.rc1:
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13845
> > >
> > > This PR exports exception handling API of MXNet. It is needed by
> Horovod
> > > with MXNet integration to elegantly throw exception at Python level
> > rather
> > > than a C++ abort.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Lin
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 2:24 PM Steffen Rochel <
> steffenroc...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear MXNet community -
> > > > Zach & friends made good progress resolving the licensing issues. One
> > > more
> > > > PR on 1.4.x branch is expected today.
> > > > The code freeze for 1.4.0.rc1 is Thursday Jan 17th 6pm PST.
> > > > I'm asking the requester to add following PR to 1.4.x branch:
> > > > Tao:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13882
> > > > Kellen:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13697
> > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13188
> > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13727
> > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13695
> > > > Pedro:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13535
> > > >
> > > > If there are additional PR to be considered for 1.4.0.rc1 please send
> > > > request to dev@.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Steffen
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 11:28 AM Qing Lan 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > I added a section F in the document that explained the current
> > > > > static-linked dependencies we used for official release. As there
> > are a
> > > > few
> > > > > licenses are under BSD3 and GPL, we need to handle them in our next
> > > > > release. Please take a look and leave any concerns you may have.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Qing
> > > > >
> > > > > On 1/7/19, 8:33 PM, "kellen sunderland" <
> > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > So I see two quick options that should cut down on the
> dependency
> > > > > licenses
> > > > > required for TRT in the source release.
> > > > >
> > > > > 1: We can simply remove in the release package the submodules
> for
> > > > onnx
> > > > > in
> > > > > folder
> > > > >
> incubator-mxnet/3rdparty/onnx-tensorrt/third_party/onnx/third_party.
> > > > >     None of those dependencies are used in the build (I've just
> > > verified
> > > > > locally on my machine).
> > > > > 2: We can make a cmake based checkout system and ensure we only
> > > > > checkout
> > > > > the required files when TRT builds are enabled (similar to the
> > > > current
> > > > > mkl-ml setup).
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd suggest option 1 for this release, an

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[kellen sunderland]

Many thanks for the license fixes and allowing some other PRs to come into
the release.

For #13697 I've contacted the author Zhennan and let him know he can cut a
branch to v1.4.x to update any APIs that are required.

For the other PRs listed here's some new PRs for the v1.4.x branch.
13188: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13898
13727: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13900
13695: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13899 <- Already
merged, thanks Haibin!

I'd also propose that we include this TensorRT PR which fixes inference
bugs and updates to a more stable commit of onnx-trt:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13897

-Kellen

On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 5:57 PM Steffen Rochel 
wrote:

> Hi Lin - please go ahead to integrate into 1.4.x.
> Steffen
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:17 PM Lin Yuan  wrote:
>
> > Hi Steffen,
> >
> > I would like to ask to include one more PR for 1.4.0.rc1:
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13845
> >
> > This PR exports exception handling API of MXNet. It is needed by Horovod
> > with MXNet integration to elegantly throw exception at Python level
> rather
> > than a C++ abort.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Lin
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 2:24 PM Steffen Rochel 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear MXNet community -
> > > Zach & friends made good progress resolving the licensing issues. One
> > more
> > > PR on 1.4.x branch is expected today.
> > > The code freeze for 1.4.0.rc1 is Thursday Jan 17th 6pm PST.
> > > I'm asking the requester to add following PR to 1.4.x branch:
> > > Tao:
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13882
> > > Kellen:
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13697
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13188
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13727
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13695
> > > Pedro:
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13535
> > >
> > > If there are additional PR to be considered for 1.4.0.rc1 please send
> > > request to dev@.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Steffen
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 11:28 AM Qing Lan  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I added a section F in the document that explained the current
> > > > static-linked dependencies we used for official release. As there
> are a
> > > few
> > > > licenses are under BSD3 and GPL, we need to handle them in our next
> > > > release. Please take a look and leave any concerns you may have.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Qing
> > > >
> > > > On 1/7/19, 8:33 PM, "kellen sunderland" <
> kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > So I see two quick options that should cut down on the dependency
> > > > licenses
> > > > required for TRT in the source release.
> > > >
> > > > 1: We can simply remove in the release package the submodules for
> > > onnx
> > > > in
> > > > folder
> > > > incubator-mxnet/3rdparty/onnx-tensorrt/third_party/onnx/third_party.
> > > > None of those dependencies are used in the build (I've just
> > verified
> > > > locally on my machine).
> > > > 2: We can make a cmake based checkout system and ensure we only
> > > > checkout
> > > > the required files when TRT builds are enabled (similar to the
> > > current
> > > > mkl-ml setup).
> > > >
> > > > I'd suggest option 1 for this release, and that we support
> option 2
> > > > for the
> > > > 1.5 release.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:19 PM Lv, Tao A 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > What should I do for the double headers in
> > > > 3rdparty/mkldnn/src/cpu/xbyak/?
> > > > >
> > > > > -tao
> > > > >
> > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 10:51 AM
> > > > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
> > > > >

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Steffen Rochel]

Hi Lin - please go ahead to integrate into 1.4.x.
Steffen

On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:17 PM Lin Yuan  wrote:

> Hi Steffen,
>
> I would like to ask to include one more PR for 1.4.0.rc1:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13845
>
> This PR exports exception handling API of MXNet. It is needed by Horovod
> with MXNet integration to elegantly throw exception at Python level rather
> than a C++ abort.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Lin
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 2:24 PM Steffen Rochel 
> wrote:
>
> > Dear MXNet community -
> > Zach & friends made good progress resolving the licensing issues. One
> more
> > PR on 1.4.x branch is expected today.
> > The code freeze for 1.4.0.rc1 is Thursday Jan 17th 6pm PST.
> > I'm asking the requester to add following PR to 1.4.x branch:
> > Tao:
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13882
> > Kellen:
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13697
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13188
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13727
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13695
> > Pedro:
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13535
> >
> > If there are additional PR to be considered for 1.4.0.rc1 please send
> > request to dev@.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Steffen
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 11:28 AM Qing Lan  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I added a section F in the document that explained the current
> > > static-linked dependencies we used for official release. As there are a
> > few
> > > licenses are under BSD3 and GPL, we need to handle them in our next
> > > release. Please take a look and leave any concerns you may have.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Qing
> > >
> > > On 1/7/19, 8:33 PM, "kellen sunderland" 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > So I see two quick options that should cut down on the dependency
> > > licenses
> > > required for TRT in the source release.
> > >
> > > 1: We can simply remove in the release package the submodules for
> > onnx
> > > in
> > > folder
> > > incubator-mxnet/3rdparty/onnx-tensorrt/third_party/onnx/third_party.
> > > None of those dependencies are used in the build (I've just
> verified
> > > locally on my machine).
> > > 2: We can make a cmake based checkout system and ensure we only
> > > checkout
> > > the required files when TRT builds are enabled (similar to the
> > current
> > > mkl-ml setup).
> > >
> > > I'd suggest option 1 for this release, and that we support option 2
> > > for the
> > > 1.5 release.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:19 PM Lv, Tao A 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > What should I do for the double headers in
> > > 3rdparty/mkldnn/src/cpu/xbyak/?
> > > >
> > > > -tao
> > > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 10:51 AM
> > > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
> > > >
> > > > Kellen and Tao -
> > > > yes, the understanding is that dependencies need to be considered
> > > and all
> > > > licences referenced to include in top level LICENSE file.
> > > > Appreciate your help with it.
> > > > Steffen
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:39 PM kellen sunderland <
> > > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Sorry to hear about the licensing issues.  I was following the
> > > general
> > > > > vote but I'm still lacking some clarity around what licenses in
> > the
> > > > > onnx-trt repo need to be surfaced.  I believe onnx-trt is MIT
> > > > > licensed, but it includes Onnx as a third party repo which then
> > > brings
> > > > > in dependencies with a variety of licenses.  The proposal is
> that
> > > we
> > > > > look at these on an individual basis and then add them to our
> top
> > > level
> > > > LICENSE file right?
> > > > >
> > > > > An a

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Lin Yuan]

Hi Steffen,

I would like to ask to include one more PR for 1.4.0.rc1:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13845

This PR exports exception handling API of MXNet. It is needed by Horovod
with MXNet integration to elegantly throw exception at Python level rather
than a C++ abort.

Thanks,

Lin


On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 2:24 PM Steffen Rochel 
wrote:

> Dear MXNet community -
> Zach & friends made good progress resolving the licensing issues. One more
> PR on 1.4.x branch is expected today.
> The code freeze for 1.4.0.rc1 is Thursday Jan 17th 6pm PST.
> I'm asking the requester to add following PR to 1.4.x branch:
> Tao:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13882
> Kellen:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13697
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13188
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13727
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13695
> Pedro:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13535
>
> If there are additional PR to be considered for 1.4.0.rc1 please send
> request to dev@.
>
> Regards,
> Steffen
>
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 11:28 AM Qing Lan  wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I added a section F in the document that explained the current
> > static-linked dependencies we used for official release. As there are a
> few
> > licenses are under BSD3 and GPL, we need to handle them in our next
> > release. Please take a look and leave any concerns you may have.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Qing
> >
> > On 1/7/19, 8:33 PM, "kellen sunderland" 
> > wrote:
> >
> > So I see two quick options that should cut down on the dependency
> > licenses
> > required for TRT in the source release.
> >
> > 1: We can simply remove in the release package the submodules for
> onnx
> > in
> > folder
> > incubator-mxnet/3rdparty/onnx-tensorrt/third_party/onnx/third_party.
> > None of those dependencies are used in the build (I've just verified
> > locally on my machine).
> > 2: We can make a cmake based checkout system and ensure we only
> > checkout
> > the required files when TRT builds are enabled (similar to the
> current
> > mkl-ml setup).
> >
> > I'd suggest option 1 for this release, and that we support option 2
> > for the
> > 1.5 release.
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:19 PM Lv, Tao A  wrote:
> >
> > > What should I do for the double headers in
> > 3rdparty/mkldnn/src/cpu/xbyak/?
> > >
> > > -tao
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 10:51 AM
> > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
> > >
> > > Kellen and Tao -
> > > yes, the understanding is that dependencies need to be considered
> > and all
> > > licences referenced to include in top level LICENSE file.
> > > Appreciate your help with it.
> > > Steffen
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:39 PM kellen sunderland <
> > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sorry to hear about the licensing issues.  I was following the
> > general
> > > > vote but I'm still lacking some clarity around what licenses in
> the
> > > > onnx-trt repo need to be surfaced.  I believe onnx-trt is MIT
> > > > licensed, but it includes Onnx as a third party repo which then
> > brings
> > > > in dependencies with a variety of licenses.  The proposal is that
> > we
> > > > look at these on an individual basis and then add them to our top
> > level
> > > LICENSE file right?
> > > >
> > > > An alternative is that we may be able to checkout a smaller
> source
> > > > code dependency tree if we remove a few unneeded ONNX's
> > dependencies
> > > > (pybind and google-bench).  My hope is that this wouldn't affect
> > our
> > > > compilation process and would get us down to two licenses to
> report
> > > > (just Onnx and Onnx-TRT, both MIT).
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:07 PM Meghna Baijal
> > > > 
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > For some more cont

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Steffen Rochel]

Dear MXNet community -
Zach & friends made good progress resolving the licensing issues. One more
PR on 1.4.x branch is expected today.
The code freeze for 1.4.0.rc1 is Thursday Jan 17th 6pm PST.
I'm asking the requester to add following PR to 1.4.x branch:
Tao:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13882
Kellen:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13697
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13188
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13727
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13695
Pedro:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13535

If there are additional PR to be considered for 1.4.0.rc1 please send
request to dev@.

Regards,
Steffen

On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 11:28 AM Qing Lan  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I added a section F in the document that explained the current
> static-linked dependencies we used for official release. As there are a few
> licenses are under BSD3 and GPL, we need to handle them in our next
> release. Please take a look and leave any concerns you may have.
>
> Thanks,
> Qing
>
> On 1/7/19, 8:33 PM, "kellen sunderland" 
> wrote:
>
> So I see two quick options that should cut down on the dependency
> licenses
> required for TRT in the source release.
>
> 1: We can simply remove in the release package the submodules for onnx
> in
> folder
> incubator-mxnet/3rdparty/onnx-tensorrt/third_party/onnx/third_party.
> None of those dependencies are used in the build (I've just verified
> locally on my machine).
> 2: We can make a cmake based checkout system and ensure we only
> checkout
> the required files when TRT builds are enabled (similar to the current
> mkl-ml setup).
>
> I'd suggest option 1 for this release, and that we support option 2
> for the
> 1.5 release.
>
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:19 PM Lv, Tao A  wrote:
>
> > What should I do for the double headers in
> 3rdparty/mkldnn/src/cpu/xbyak/?
> >
> > -tao
> >
> > -Original Message-
>     > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 10:51 AM
> > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
> >
> > Kellen and Tao -
> > yes, the understanding is that dependencies need to be considered
> and all
> > licences referenced to include in top level LICENSE file.
> > Appreciate your help with it.
> > Steffen
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:39 PM kellen sunderland <
> > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry to hear about the licensing issues.  I was following the
> general
> > > vote but I'm still lacking some clarity around what licenses in the
> > > onnx-trt repo need to be surfaced.  I believe onnx-trt is MIT
> > > licensed, but it includes Onnx as a third party repo which then
> brings
> > > in dependencies with a variety of licenses.  The proposal is that
> we
> > > look at these on an individual basis and then add them to our top
> level
> > LICENSE file right?
> > >
> > > An alternative is that we may be able to checkout a smaller source
> > > code dependency tree if we remove a few unneeded ONNX's
> dependencies
> > > (pybind and google-bench).  My hope is that this wouldn't affect
> our
> > > compilation process and would get us down to two licenses to report
> > > (just Onnx and Onnx-TRT, both MIT).
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:07 PM Meghna Baijal
> > > 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi All,
> > > > For some more context, these were the last emails I sent on the
> dev
> > > > and legal lists requesting help on the open questions  –
> > > >
> > > > 1. Question on legal about the CC-By-2.5 <
> > > >
> > >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201805.mbox
> > > /%3CCAK1xzDe6ECToKt_2cTR_7txQQCwHeYfvxXDfmuGgfA3jaTs=
> j...@mail.gmail.com
> > > %3E
> > > > >
> > > > 2. Question on dev about googletest file <
> > > >
> > >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mxnet-dev/201804.mbox/%3CCAMG
> > > gKDC8szdfFqQhhSNpwwT_3zi4LBS7A=u4v7kj4ule44u...@mail.gmail.com%3E
> > > > >
> > > > 3. General Request for review of the licenses wiki <
> > > &g

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Qing Lan]

Hi all,

I added a section F in the document that explained the current static-linked 
dependencies we used for official release. As there are a few licenses are 
under BSD3 and GPL, we need to handle them in our next release. Please take a 
look and leave any concerns you may have.

Thanks,
Qing

On 1/7/19, 8:33 PM, "kellen sunderland"  wrote:

So I see two quick options that should cut down on the dependency licenses
required for TRT in the source release.

1: We can simply remove in the release package the submodules for onnx in
folder incubator-mxnet/3rdparty/onnx-tensorrt/third_party/onnx/third_party.
None of those dependencies are used in the build (I've just verified
locally on my machine).
2: We can make a cmake based checkout system and ensure we only checkout
the required files when TRT builds are enabled (similar to the current
mkl-ml setup).

I'd suggest option 1 for this release, and that we support option 2 for the
1.5 release.

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:19 PM Lv, Tao A  wrote:

> What should I do for the double headers in 3rdparty/mkldnn/src/cpu/xbyak/?
>
> -tao
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 10:51 AM
> To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
    > Subject: Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
>
> Kellen and Tao -
> yes, the understanding is that dependencies need to be considered and all
> licences referenced to include in top level LICENSE file.
> Appreciate your help with it.
> Steffen
>
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:39 PM kellen sunderland <
> kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Sorry to hear about the licensing issues.  I was following the general
> > vote but I'm still lacking some clarity around what licenses in the
> > onnx-trt repo need to be surfaced.  I believe onnx-trt is MIT
> > licensed, but it includes Onnx as a third party repo which then brings
> > in dependencies with a variety of licenses.  The proposal is that we
> > look at these on an individual basis and then add them to our top level
> LICENSE file right?
> >
> > An alternative is that we may be able to checkout a smaller source
> > code dependency tree if we remove a few unneeded ONNX's dependencies
> > (pybind and google-bench).  My hope is that this wouldn't affect our
> > compilation process and would get us down to two licenses to report
> > (just Onnx and Onnx-TRT, both MIT).
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:07 PM Meghna Baijal
> > 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > > For some more context, these were the last emails I sent on the dev
> > > and legal lists requesting help on the open questions  –
> > >
> > > 1. Question on legal about the CC-By-2.5 <
> > >
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201805.mbox
> > /%3CCAK1xzDe6ECToKt_2cTR_7txQQCwHeYfvxXDfmuGgfA3jaTs=j...@mail.gmail.com
> > %3E
> > > >
> > > 2. Question on dev about googletest file <
> > >
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mxnet-dev/201804.mbox/%3CCAMG
> > gKDC8szdfFqQhhSNpwwT_3zi4LBS7A=u4v7kj4ule44u...@mail.gmail.com%3E
> > > >
> > > 3. General Request for review of the licenses wiki <
> > >
> > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mxnet-dev/201801.mbox/%3CCAM
> > GgKDCi=s933zcVWwei15i5uBC1h88VUogt3Br=Vq28=vi...@mail.gmail.com%3E
> > > >
> > >
> > >  (Note: You can click on the the “>>” next to the thread on the top
> > > right to view the next responses in the email threads in the apache
> > > archive. )
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Meghna Baijal
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 4:30 PM Steffen Rochel
> > > 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear MXNet community -
> > > > as you should have seen in previous email, voting for v1.4.0.rc0
> > > > has
> > been
> > > > cancelled. We received a -1 vote due to outstanding license issues.
> > > > Please help to update
> > > >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Source+License
> > s
> > > > and
> > > > resolve outstanding issues.
> > > >
> > > > I would like to

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[kellen sunderland]

So I see two quick options that should cut down on the dependency licenses
required for TRT in the source release.

1: We can simply remove in the release package the submodules for onnx in
folder incubator-mxnet/3rdparty/onnx-tensorrt/third_party/onnx/third_party.
None of those dependencies are used in the build (I've just verified
locally on my machine).
2: We can make a cmake based checkout system and ensure we only checkout
the required files when TRT builds are enabled (similar to the current
mkl-ml setup).

I'd suggest option 1 for this release, and that we support option 2 for the
1.5 release.

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 8:19 PM Lv, Tao A  wrote:

> What should I do for the double headers in 3rdparty/mkldnn/src/cpu/xbyak/?
>
> -tao
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 10:51 AM
> To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
>
> Kellen and Tao -
> yes, the understanding is that dependencies need to be considered and all
> licences referenced to include in top level LICENSE file.
> Appreciate your help with it.
> Steffen
>
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:39 PM kellen sunderland <
> kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Sorry to hear about the licensing issues.  I was following the general
> > vote but I'm still lacking some clarity around what licenses in the
> > onnx-trt repo need to be surfaced.  I believe onnx-trt is MIT
> > licensed, but it includes Onnx as a third party repo which then brings
> > in dependencies with a variety of licenses.  The proposal is that we
> > look at these on an individual basis and then add them to our top level
> LICENSE file right?
> >
> > An alternative is that we may be able to checkout a smaller source
> > code dependency tree if we remove a few unneeded ONNX's dependencies
> > (pybind and google-bench).  My hope is that this wouldn't affect our
> > compilation process and would get us down to two licenses to report
> > (just Onnx and Onnx-TRT, both MIT).
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:07 PM Meghna Baijal
> > 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > > For some more context, these were the last emails I sent on the dev
> > > and legal lists requesting help on the open questions  –
> > >
> > > 1. Question on legal about the CC-By-2.5 <
> > >
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201805.mbox
> > /%3CCAK1xzDe6ECToKt_2cTR_7txQQCwHeYfvxXDfmuGgfA3jaTs=j...@mail.gmail.com
> > %3E
> > > >
> > > 2. Question on dev about googletest file <
> > >
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mxnet-dev/201804.mbox/%3CCAMG
> > gKDC8szdfFqQhhSNpwwT_3zi4LBS7A=u4v7kj4ule44u...@mail.gmail.com%3E
> > > >
> > > 3. General Request for review of the licenses wiki <
> > >
> > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mxnet-dev/201801.mbox/%3CCAM
> > GgKDCi=s933zcVWwei15i5uBC1h88VUogt3Br=Vq28=vi...@mail.gmail.com%3E
> > > >
> > >
> > >  (Note: You can click on the the “>>” next to the thread on the top
> > > right to view the next responses in the email threads in the apache
> > > archive. )
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Meghna Baijal
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 4:30 PM Steffen Rochel
> > > 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear MXNet community -
> > > > as you should have seen in previous email, voting for v1.4.0.rc0
> > > > has
> > been
> > > > cancelled. We received a -1 vote due to outstanding license issues.
> > > > Please help to update
> > > >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Source+License
> > s
> > > > and
> > > > resolve outstanding issues.
> > > >
> > > > I would like to ask specifically for help from contributors to
> > > > mkldnn, opemmp and onnx-tensorrt to address the feedback from
> > > > Justin - see
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ebb8c4c00fb66dd98da13621c7dcb8753
> > fee57562a861d61379d31e9@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > > > .
> > > >
> > > > I suggest to fix the issues first on master, then cherry-pick and
> > > > merge
> > > to
> > > > 1.4.x branch.
> > > >
> > > > I'm suggesting to exclude Julia from 1.4.0 release as integration
> > > > into MXNet repo and upgrade to 0.7+ is WIP.
&g

RE: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Lv, Tao A]

What should I do for the double headers in 3rdparty/mkldnn/src/cpu/xbyak/?

-tao

-Original Message-
From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 10:51 AM
To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

Kellen and Tao -
yes, the understanding is that dependencies need to be considered and all 
licences referenced to include in top level LICENSE file.
Appreciate your help with it.
Steffen

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:39 PM kellen sunderland < kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> 
wrote:

> Sorry to hear about the licensing issues.  I was following the general 
> vote but I'm still lacking some clarity around what licenses in the 
> onnx-trt repo need to be surfaced.  I believe onnx-trt is MIT 
> licensed, but it includes Onnx as a third party repo which then brings 
> in dependencies with a variety of licenses.  The proposal is that we 
> look at these on an individual basis and then add them to our top level 
> LICENSE file right?
>
> An alternative is that we may be able to checkout a smaller source 
> code dependency tree if we remove a few unneeded ONNX's dependencies 
> (pybind and google-bench).  My hope is that this wouldn't affect our 
> compilation process and would get us down to two licenses to report 
> (just Onnx and Onnx-TRT, both MIT).
>
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:07 PM Meghna Baijal 
> 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> > For some more context, these were the last emails I sent on the dev 
> > and legal lists requesting help on the open questions  –
> >
> > 1. Question on legal about the CC-By-2.5 <
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201805.mbox
> /%3CCAK1xzDe6ECToKt_2cTR_7txQQCwHeYfvxXDfmuGgfA3jaTs=j...@mail.gmail.com
> %3E
> > >
> > 2. Question on dev about googletest file <
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mxnet-dev/201804.mbox/%3CCAMG
> gKDC8szdfFqQhhSNpwwT_3zi4LBS7A=u4v7kj4ule44u...@mail.gmail.com%3E
> > >
> > 3. General Request for review of the licenses wiki <
> >
> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mxnet-dev/201801.mbox/%3CCAM
> GgKDCi=s933zcVWwei15i5uBC1h88VUogt3Br=Vq28=vi...@mail.gmail.com%3E
> > >
> >
> >  (Note: You can click on the the “>>” next to the thread on the top 
> > right to view the next responses in the email threads in the apache 
> > archive. )
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Meghna Baijal
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 4:30 PM Steffen Rochel 
> > 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear MXNet community -
> > > as you should have seen in previous email, voting for v1.4.0.rc0 
> > > has
> been
> > > cancelled. We received a -1 vote due to outstanding license issues.
> > > Please help to update
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Source+License
> s
> > > and
> > > resolve outstanding issues.
> > >
> > > I would like to ask specifically for help from contributors to 
> > > mkldnn, opemmp and onnx-tensorrt to address the feedback from 
> > > Justin - see
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ebb8c4c00fb66dd98da13621c7dcb8753
> fee57562a861d61379d31e9@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > > .
> > >
> > > I suggest to fix the issues first on master, then cherry-pick and 
> > > merge
> > to
> > > 1.4.x branch.
> > >
> > > I'm suggesting to exclude Julia from 1.4.0 release as integration 
> > > into MXNet repo and upgrade to 0.7+ is WIP.
> > > I'm suggesting to exclude googletest/googlemock from 1.4.0 release 
> > > as outstanind license issues are not resolved yet. This should not 
> > > impact users.
> > >
> > > Please provide your feedback to the suggestions.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Steffen
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 1:34 PM Steffen Rochel <
> steffenroc...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear MXNet community -
> > > > I hope you have seen that voting for v1.4.0.rc0 has started and 
> > > > will continue until December 27th noon. So far two binding +1 votes.
> > > > I suggesting the following schedule to account for holidays and 
> > > > of
> > course
> > > > depending on voting feedback.
> > > >
> > > > Vote on dev@ until 12/27
> > > >
> > > > Vote on general@ 12/28 – 1/3
> > > >
> > > > Release announcement with pre-build language bindings

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Steffen Rochel]

Kellen and Tao -
yes, the understanding is that dependencies need to be considered and all
licences referenced to include in top level LICENSE file.
Appreciate your help with it.
Steffen

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:39 PM kellen sunderland <
kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Sorry to hear about the licensing issues.  I was following the general vote
> but I'm still lacking some clarity around what licenses in the onnx-trt
> repo need to be surfaced.  I believe onnx-trt is MIT licensed, but it
> includes Onnx as a third party repo which then brings in dependencies with
> a variety of licenses.  The proposal is that we look at these on an
> individual basis and then add them to our top level LICENSE file right?
>
> An alternative is that we may be able to checkout a smaller source code
> dependency tree if we remove a few unneeded ONNX's dependencies (pybind and
> google-bench).  My hope is that this wouldn't affect our compilation
> process and would get us down to two licenses to report (just Onnx and
> Onnx-TRT, both MIT).
>
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:07 PM Meghna Baijal 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> > For some more context, these were the last emails I sent on the dev and
> > legal lists requesting help on the open questions  –
> >
> > 1. Question on legal about the CC-By-2.5
> > <
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201805.mbox/%3CCAK1xzDe6ECToKt_2cTR_7txQQCwHeYfvxXDfmuGgfA3jaTs=j...@mail.gmail.com%3E
> > >
> > 2. Question on dev about googletest file
> > <
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mxnet-dev/201804.mbox/%3CCAMGgKDC8szdfFqQhhSNpwwT_3zi4LBS7A=u4v7kj4ule44u...@mail.gmail.com%3E
> > >
> > 3. General Request for review of the licenses wiki
> > <
> >
> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mxnet-dev/201801.mbox/%3CCAMGgKDCi=s933zcVWwei15i5uBC1h88VUogt3Br=Vq28=vi...@mail.gmail.com%3E
> > >
> >
> >  (Note: You can click on the the “>>” next to the thread on the top right
> > to view the next responses in the email threads in the apache archive. )
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Meghna Baijal
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 4:30 PM Steffen Rochel 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear MXNet community -
> > > as you should have seen in previous email, voting for v1.4.0.rc0 has
> been
> > > cancelled. We received a -1 vote due to outstanding license issues.
> > > Please help to update
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Source+Licenses
> > > and
> > > resolve outstanding issues.
> > >
> > > I would like to ask specifically for help from contributors to mkldnn,
> > > opemmp and onnx-tensorrt to address the feedback from Justin - see
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ebb8c4c00fb66dd98da13621c7dcb8753fee57562a861d61379d31e9@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > > .
> > >
> > > I suggest to fix the issues first on master, then cherry-pick and merge
> > to
> > > 1.4.x branch.
> > >
> > > I'm suggesting to exclude Julia from 1.4.0 release as integration into
> > > MXNet repo and upgrade to 0.7+ is WIP.
> > > I'm suggesting to exclude googletest/googlemock from 1.4.0 release as
> > > outstanind license issues are not resolved yet. This should not impact
> > > users.
> > >
> > > Please provide your feedback to the suggestions.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Steffen
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 1:34 PM Steffen Rochel <
> steffenroc...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear MXNet community -
> > > > I hope you have seen that voting for v1.4.0.rc0 has started and will
> > > > continue until December 27th noon. So far two binding +1 votes.
> > > > I suggesting the following schedule to account for holidays and of
> > course
> > > > depending on voting feedback.
> > > >
> > > > Vote on dev@ until 12/27
> > > >
> > > > Vote on general@ 12/28 – 1/3
> > > >
> > > > Release announcement with pre-build language bindings 1/9
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Please let me know if you have concerns with the proposed schedule.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Steffen
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 11:22 AM Haibin Lin <
> haibin.lin@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi Steffen,
> > > >>
> > > >> Aston and I would like to bring this PR to your attention:
> > > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13686, where Zhi
> fixed
> > > the
> > > >> num_worker argument of DataLoader on windows. Without this fix,
> using
> > > >> DataLoader with num_worker > 0 would result in crash on Windows.
> > > Bringing
> > > >> this PR to 1.4.x would greatly benefit windows users of MXNet. Aston
> > is
> > > >> working on the dive into deep learning book
> > > >>  based on MXNet, which is due and
> > > frozen
> > > >> for publication next week. Currently the book will depend on MXNet
> > 1.4.0
> > > >> and discourages readers from using multi-worker DataLoaders due to
> > this
> > > >> bug
> > > >> on Windows. With this fix Aston can update the examples in the book
> > with
> > > >> DataLoader using mult

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[kellen sunderland]

Sorry to hear about the licensing issues.  I was following the general vote
but I'm still lacking some clarity around what licenses in the onnx-trt
repo need to be surfaced.  I believe onnx-trt is MIT licensed, but it
includes Onnx as a third party repo which then brings in dependencies with
a variety of licenses.  The proposal is that we look at these on an
individual basis and then add them to our top level LICENSE file right?

An alternative is that we may be able to checkout a smaller source code
dependency tree if we remove a few unneeded ONNX's dependencies (pybind and
google-bench).  My hope is that this wouldn't affect our compilation
process and would get us down to two licenses to report (just Onnx and
Onnx-TRT, both MIT).

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:07 PM Meghna Baijal 
wrote:

> Hi All,
> For some more context, these were the last emails I sent on the dev and
> legal lists requesting help on the open questions  –
>
> 1. Question on legal about the CC-By-2.5
> <
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201805.mbox/%3CCAK1xzDe6ECToKt_2cTR_7txQQCwHeYfvxXDfmuGgfA3jaTs=j...@mail.gmail.com%3E
> >
> 2. Question on dev about googletest file
> <
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mxnet-dev/201804.mbox/%3CCAMGgKDC8szdfFqQhhSNpwwT_3zi4LBS7A=u4v7kj4ule44u...@mail.gmail.com%3E
> >
> 3. General Request for review of the licenses wiki
> <
> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mxnet-dev/201801.mbox/%3CCAMGgKDCi=s933zcVWwei15i5uBC1h88VUogt3Br=Vq28=vi...@mail.gmail.com%3E
> >
>
>  (Note: You can click on the the “>>” next to the thread on the top right
> to view the next responses in the email threads in the apache archive. )
>
> Thanks,
> Meghna Baijal
>
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 4:30 PM Steffen Rochel 
> wrote:
>
> > Dear MXNet community -
> > as you should have seen in previous email, voting for v1.4.0.rc0 has been
> > cancelled. We received a -1 vote due to outstanding license issues.
> > Please help to update
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Source+Licenses
> > and
> > resolve outstanding issues.
> >
> > I would like to ask specifically for help from contributors to mkldnn,
> > opemmp and onnx-tensorrt to address the feedback from Justin - see
> >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ebb8c4c00fb66dd98da13621c7dcb8753fee57562a861d61379d31e9@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > .
> >
> > I suggest to fix the issues first on master, then cherry-pick and merge
> to
> > 1.4.x branch.
> >
> > I'm suggesting to exclude Julia from 1.4.0 release as integration into
> > MXNet repo and upgrade to 0.7+ is WIP.
> > I'm suggesting to exclude googletest/googlemock from 1.4.0 release as
> > outstanind license issues are not resolved yet. This should not impact
> > users.
> >
> > Please provide your feedback to the suggestions.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Steffen
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 1:34 PM Steffen Rochel 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear MXNet community -
> > > I hope you have seen that voting for v1.4.0.rc0 has started and will
> > > continue until December 27th noon. So far two binding +1 votes.
> > > I suggesting the following schedule to account for holidays and of
> course
> > > depending on voting feedback.
> > >
> > > Vote on dev@ until 12/27
> > >
> > > Vote on general@ 12/28 – 1/3
> > >
> > > Release announcement with pre-build language bindings 1/9
> > >
> > >
> > > Please let me know if you have concerns with the proposed schedule.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Steffen
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 11:22 AM Haibin Lin 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi Steffen,
> > >>
> > >> Aston and I would like to bring this PR to your attention:
> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13686, where Zhi fixed
> > the
> > >> num_worker argument of DataLoader on windows. Without this fix, using
> > >> DataLoader with num_worker > 0 would result in crash on Windows.
> > Bringing
> > >> this PR to 1.4.x would greatly benefit windows users of MXNet. Aston
> is
> > >> working on the dive into deep learning book
> > >>  based on MXNet, which is due and
> > frozen
> > >> for publication next week. Currently the book will depend on MXNet
> 1.4.0
> > >> and discourages readers from using multi-worker DataLoaders due to
> this
> > >> bug
> > >> on Windows. With this fix Aston can update the examples in the book
> with
> > >> DataLoader using multiple workers, which will be very beneficial to
> the
> > >> broader MXNet community.
> > >>
> > >> Best,
> > >> Haibin
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 6:11 AM Pedro Larroy <
> > >> pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi Steffen
> > >> >
> > >> > Added some notes in your PR for the release notes.
> > >> >
> > >> > In particular, I'm a bit concerned about the status of topology
> aware
> > >> > communication, since it has open issues and is not being tested in
> CI.
> > >> > (The tests also fail). I think we should anounce it when it's
> working
> > >>

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Meghna Baijal]

Hi All,
For some more context, these were the last emails I sent on the dev and
legal lists requesting help on the open questions  –

1. Question on legal about the CC-By-2.5

2. Question on dev about googletest file

3. General Request for review of the licenses wiki


 (Note: You can click on the the “>>” next to the thread on the top right
to view the next responses in the email threads in the apache archive. )

Thanks,
Meghna Baijal

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 4:30 PM Steffen Rochel 
wrote:

> Dear MXNet community -
> as you should have seen in previous email, voting for v1.4.0.rc0 has been
> cancelled. We received a -1 vote due to outstanding license issues.
> Please help to update
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Source+Licenses
> and
> resolve outstanding issues.
>
> I would like to ask specifically for help from contributors to mkldnn,
> opemmp and onnx-tensorrt to address the feedback from Justin - see
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ebb8c4c00fb66dd98da13621c7dcb8753fee57562a861d61379d31e9@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> .
>
> I suggest to fix the issues first on master, then cherry-pick and merge to
> 1.4.x branch.
>
> I'm suggesting to exclude Julia from 1.4.0 release as integration into
> MXNet repo and upgrade to 0.7+ is WIP.
> I'm suggesting to exclude googletest/googlemock from 1.4.0 release as
> outstanind license issues are not resolved yet. This should not impact
> users.
>
> Please provide your feedback to the suggestions.
>
> Regards,
> Steffen
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 1:34 PM Steffen Rochel 
> wrote:
>
> > Dear MXNet community -
> > I hope you have seen that voting for v1.4.0.rc0 has started and will
> > continue until December 27th noon. So far two binding +1 votes.
> > I suggesting the following schedule to account for holidays and of course
> > depending on voting feedback.
> >
> > Vote on dev@ until 12/27
> >
> > Vote on general@ 12/28 – 1/3
> >
> > Release announcement with pre-build language bindings 1/9
> >
> >
> > Please let me know if you have concerns with the proposed schedule.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Steffen
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 11:22 AM Haibin Lin 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Steffen,
> >>
> >> Aston and I would like to bring this PR to your attention:
> >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13686, where Zhi fixed
> the
> >> num_worker argument of DataLoader on windows. Without this fix, using
> >> DataLoader with num_worker > 0 would result in crash on Windows.
> Bringing
> >> this PR to 1.4.x would greatly benefit windows users of MXNet. Aston is
> >> working on the dive into deep learning book
> >>  based on MXNet, which is due and
> frozen
> >> for publication next week. Currently the book will depend on MXNet 1.4.0
> >> and discourages readers from using multi-worker DataLoaders due to this
> >> bug
> >> on Windows. With this fix Aston can update the examples in the book with
> >> DataLoader using multiple workers, which will be very beneficial to the
> >> broader MXNet community.
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Haibin
> >>
> >> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 6:11 AM Pedro Larroy <
> >> pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi Steffen
> >> >
> >> > Added some notes in your PR for the release notes.
> >> >
> >> > In particular, I'm a bit concerned about the status of topology aware
> >> > communication, since it has open issues and is not being tested in CI.
> >> > (The tests also fail). I think we should anounce it when it's working
> >> > properly and it's well tested.
> >> >
> >> > Pedro.
> >> >
> >> > On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 11:06 AM Steffen Rochel <
> >> steffenroc...@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Dear MXNet community -
> >> > > all issues beside one
> >> > >  have been
> >> > > addressed. I suggest to document the last remaining issue as known
> >> > problem
> >> > > and move forward with the release.
> >> > > Please communicate if you have concerns of know about critical
> issues
> >> to
> >> > be
> >> > > addressed before starting vote about releasing 1.4.0 as soon as
> >> possible.
> >> > > Please also have a look at the release notes
> >> > > <
> >> >
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Notes
> >> > >
> >> > > and provide feedback.
> >> > >
> >> > > I'm planing to start voting beginning of next week.
> >> > > Steffen
> >> > >
> >> > > On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 8:31 PM Steffen Rochel <
> >> steffenroc...@gmail.com>
> >> > > wrote

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Steffen Rochel]

Dear MXNet community -
as you should have seen in previous email, voting for v1.4.0.rc0 has been
cancelled. We received a -1 vote due to outstanding license issues.
Please help to update
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Source+Licenses and
resolve outstanding issues.

I would like to ask specifically for help from contributors to mkldnn,
opemmp and onnx-tensorrt to address the feedback from Justin - see
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ebb8c4c00fb66dd98da13621c7dcb8753fee57562a861d61379d31e9@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
.

I suggest to fix the issues first on master, then cherry-pick and merge to
1.4.x branch.

I'm suggesting to exclude Julia from 1.4.0 release as integration into
MXNet repo and upgrade to 0.7+ is WIP.
I'm suggesting to exclude googletest/googlemock from 1.4.0 release as
outstanind license issues are not resolved yet. This should not impact
users.

Please provide your feedback to the suggestions.

Regards,
Steffen


On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 1:34 PM Steffen Rochel 
wrote:

> Dear MXNet community -
> I hope you have seen that voting for v1.4.0.rc0 has started and will
> continue until December 27th noon. So far two binding +1 votes.
> I suggesting the following schedule to account for holidays and of course
> depending on voting feedback.
>
> Vote on dev@ until 12/27
>
> Vote on general@ 12/28 – 1/3
>
> Release announcement with pre-build language bindings 1/9
>
>
> Please let me know if you have concerns with the proposed schedule.
>
> Regards,
> Steffen
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 11:22 AM Haibin Lin 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Steffen,
>>
>> Aston and I would like to bring this PR to your attention:
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13686, where Zhi fixed the
>> num_worker argument of DataLoader on windows. Without this fix, using
>> DataLoader with num_worker > 0 would result in crash on Windows. Bringing
>> this PR to 1.4.x would greatly benefit windows users of MXNet. Aston is
>> working on the dive into deep learning book
>>  based on MXNet, which is due and frozen
>> for publication next week. Currently the book will depend on MXNet 1.4.0
>> and discourages readers from using multi-worker DataLoaders due to this
>> bug
>> on Windows. With this fix Aston can update the examples in the book with
>> DataLoader using multiple workers, which will be very beneficial to the
>> broader MXNet community.
>>
>> Best,
>> Haibin
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 6:11 AM Pedro Larroy <
>> pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Steffen
>> >
>> > Added some notes in your PR for the release notes.
>> >
>> > In particular, I'm a bit concerned about the status of topology aware
>> > communication, since it has open issues and is not being tested in CI.
>> > (The tests also fail). I think we should anounce it when it's working
>> > properly and it's well tested.
>> >
>> > Pedro.
>> >
>> > On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 11:06 AM Steffen Rochel <
>> steffenroc...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Dear MXNet community -
>> > > all issues beside one
>> > >  have been
>> > > addressed. I suggest to document the last remaining issue as known
>> > problem
>> > > and move forward with the release.
>> > > Please communicate if you have concerns of know about critical issues
>> to
>> > be
>> > > addressed before starting vote about releasing 1.4.0 as soon as
>> possible.
>> > > Please also have a look at the release notes
>> > > <
>> >
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Notes
>> > >
>> > > and provide feedback.
>> > >
>> > > I'm planing to start voting beginning of next week.
>> > > Steffen
>> > >
>> > > On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 8:31 PM Steffen Rochel <
>> steffenroc...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hi Pedro - this are indeed the draft release notes for v1.4.0.
>> Please
>> > add
>> > > > description as you suggested.
>> > > >
>> > > > All - please have a look at the release notes and provide feedback
>> and
>> > > > suggestions..
>> > > > Steffen
>> > > > On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 3:30 AM Zhao, Patric 
>> > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> Hi Steffen,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> I saw the draft of 1.4 release notes in here (
>> > > >>
>> >
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Notes
>> > > >> ).
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Is this near the final version?  I'd like to add some descriptions
>> of
>> > new
>> > > >> quantization features enabled in 1.4.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Is it OK?
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Thanks,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> --Patric
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> > -Original Message-
>> > > >> > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
>> > > >> > Sent: Saturday, December 8, 2018 1:12 AM
>> > > >> > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
>> > > >> > Subject: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > Dear MXNet community -
>> > > >> > I would li

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Steffen Rochel]

Dear MXNet community -
I hope you have seen that voting for v1.4.0.rc0 has started and will
continue until December 27th noon. So far two binding +1 votes.
I suggesting the following schedule to account for holidays and of course
depending on voting feedback.

Vote on dev@ until 12/27

Vote on general@ 12/28 – 1/3

Release announcement with pre-build language bindings 1/9


Please let me know if you have concerns with the proposed schedule.

Regards,
Steffen


On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 11:22 AM Haibin Lin 
wrote:

> Hi Steffen,
>
> Aston and I would like to bring this PR to your attention:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13686, where Zhi fixed the
> num_worker argument of DataLoader on windows. Without this fix, using
> DataLoader with num_worker > 0 would result in crash on Windows. Bringing
> this PR to 1.4.x would greatly benefit windows users of MXNet. Aston is
> working on the dive into deep learning book
>  based on MXNet, which is due and frozen
> for publication next week. Currently the book will depend on MXNet 1.4.0
> and discourages readers from using multi-worker DataLoaders due to this bug
> on Windows. With this fix Aston can update the examples in the book with
> DataLoader using multiple workers, which will be very beneficial to the
> broader MXNet community.
>
> Best,
> Haibin
>
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 6:11 AM Pedro Larroy  >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Steffen
> >
> > Added some notes in your PR for the release notes.
> >
> > In particular, I'm a bit concerned about the status of topology aware
> > communication, since it has open issues and is not being tested in CI.
> > (The tests also fail). I think we should anounce it when it's working
> > properly and it's well tested.
> >
> > Pedro.
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 11:06 AM Steffen Rochel  >
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear MXNet community -
> > > all issues beside one
> > >  have been
> > > addressed. I suggest to document the last remaining issue as known
> > problem
> > > and move forward with the release.
> > > Please communicate if you have concerns of know about critical issues
> to
> > be
> > > addressed before starting vote about releasing 1.4.0 as soon as
> possible.
> > > Please also have a look at the release notes
> > > <
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Notes
> > >
> > > and provide feedback.
> > >
> > > I'm planing to start voting beginning of next week.
> > > Steffen
> > >
> > > On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 8:31 PM Steffen Rochel  >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Pedro - this are indeed the draft release notes for v1.4.0. Please
> > add
> > > > description as you suggested.
> > > >
> > > > All - please have a look at the release notes and provide feedback
> and
> > > > suggestions..
> > > > Steffen
> > > > On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 3:30 AM Zhao, Patric 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi Steffen,
> > > >>
> > > >> I saw the draft of 1.4 release notes in here (
> > > >>
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Notes
> > > >> ).
> > > >>
> > > >> Is this near the final version?  I'd like to add some descriptions
> of
> > new
> > > >> quantization features enabled in 1.4.
> > > >>
> > > >> Is it OK?
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >>
> > > >> --Patric
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> > -Original Message-
> > > >> > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
> > > >> > Sent: Saturday, December 8, 2018 1:12 AM
> > > >> > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> > > >> > Subject: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Dear MXNet community -
> > > >> > I would like to provide update on v1.4.0 status, details are
> tracked
> > > >> here
> > > >> > <
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28i
> > > >> > ncubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Plan+and+Status>
> > > >> > .
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Thank you very much for everybody effort to resolve the identified
> > > >> issues.
> > > >> > We are down to 3 open issues - for details please see
> > > >> >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28in
> > > >> > cubating%29+1.
> > > >> > 4.0
> > > >> >
> > +Release+Plan+and+Status#ApacheMXNet(incubating)1.4.0ReleasePlanandSt
> > > >> > atu
> > > >> > +Release+Plan+and+s-OpenPRstotrack
> > > >> > <
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28i
> > > >> >
> ncubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Plan+and+Status#ApacheMXNet(incubating)1.
> > > >> > 4.0ReleasePlanandStatus-OpenPRstotrack>
> > > >> > Please help to resolve the remaining issues and integrate to
> v1.4.x
> > > >> branch.
> > > >> > Current estimate to address the identified security
> vulnerabilities
> > in
> > > >> the
> > > >> > Scala/Java package and merge into v1.4.x branch is end of next
> week
> > > >> > (December 14th) I will communicate as soon I have more
> information.
> > > >> >
>

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Haibin Lin]

Hi Steffen,

Aston and I would like to bring this PR to your attention:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13686, where Zhi fixed the
num_worker argument of DataLoader on windows. Without this fix, using
DataLoader with num_worker > 0 would result in crash on Windows. Bringing
this PR to 1.4.x would greatly benefit windows users of MXNet. Aston is
working on the dive into deep learning book
 based on MXNet, which is due and frozen
for publication next week. Currently the book will depend on MXNet 1.4.0
and discourages readers from using multi-worker DataLoaders due to this bug
on Windows. With this fix Aston can update the examples in the book with
DataLoader using multiple workers, which will be very beneficial to the
broader MXNet community.

Best,
Haibin

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 6:11 AM Pedro Larroy 
wrote:

> Hi Steffen
>
> Added some notes in your PR for the release notes.
>
> In particular, I'm a bit concerned about the status of topology aware
> communication, since it has open issues and is not being tested in CI.
> (The tests also fail). I think we should anounce it when it's working
> properly and it's well tested.
>
> Pedro.
>
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 11:06 AM Steffen Rochel 
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear MXNet community -
> > all issues beside one
> >  have been
> > addressed. I suggest to document the last remaining issue as known
> problem
> > and move forward with the release.
> > Please communicate if you have concerns of know about critical issues to
> be
> > addressed before starting vote about releasing 1.4.0 as soon as possible.
> > Please also have a look at the release notes
> > <
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Notes
> >
> > and provide feedback.
> >
> > I'm planing to start voting beginning of next week.
> > Steffen
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 8:31 PM Steffen Rochel 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Pedro - this are indeed the draft release notes for v1.4.0. Please
> add
> > > description as you suggested.
> > >
> > > All - please have a look at the release notes and provide feedback and
> > > suggestions..
> > > Steffen
> > > On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 3:30 AM Zhao, Patric 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi Steffen,
> > >>
> > >> I saw the draft of 1.4 release notes in here (
> > >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Notes
> > >> ).
> > >>
> > >> Is this near the final version?  I'd like to add some descriptions of
> new
> > >> quantization features enabled in 1.4.
> > >>
> > >> Is it OK?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >>
> > >> --Patric
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> > -Original Message-
> > >> > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
> > >> > Sent: Saturday, December 8, 2018 1:12 AM
> > >> > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> > >> > Subject: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
> > >> >
> > >> > Dear MXNet community -
> > >> > I would like to provide update on v1.4.0 status, details are tracked
> > >> here
> > >> > <
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28i
> > >> > ncubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Plan+and+Status>
> > >> > .
> > >> >
> > >> > Thank you very much for everybody effort to resolve the identified
> > >> issues.
> > >> > We are down to 3 open issues - for details please see
> > >> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28in
> > >> > cubating%29+1.
> > >> > 4.0
> > >> >
> +Release+Plan+and+Status#ApacheMXNet(incubating)1.4.0ReleasePlanandSt
> > >> > atu
> > >> > +Release+Plan+and+s-OpenPRstotrack
> > >> > <
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28i
> > >> > ncubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Plan+and+Status#ApacheMXNet(incubating)1.
> > >> > 4.0ReleasePlanandStatus-OpenPRstotrack>
> > >> > Please help to resolve the remaining issues and integrate to v1.4.x
> > >> branch.
> > >> > Current estimate to address the identified security vulnerabilities
> in
> > >> the
> > >> > Scala/Java package and merge into v1.4.x branch is end of next week
> > >> > (December 14th) I will communicate as soon I have more information.
> > >> >
> > >> > Regards,
> > >> > Steffen
> > >>
> > >
>

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Pedro Larroy]

Hi Steffen

Added some notes in your PR for the release notes.

In particular, I'm a bit concerned about the status of topology aware
communication, since it has open issues and is not being tested in CI.
(The tests also fail). I think we should anounce it when it's working
properly and it's well tested.

Pedro.

On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 11:06 AM Steffen Rochel  wrote:
>
> Dear MXNet community -
> all issues beside one
>  have been
> addressed. I suggest to document the last remaining issue as known problem
> and move forward with the release.
> Please communicate if you have concerns of know about critical issues to be
> addressed before starting vote about releasing 1.4.0 as soon as possible.
> Please also have a look at the release notes
> 
> and provide feedback.
>
> I'm planing to start voting beginning of next week.
> Steffen
>
> On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 8:31 PM Steffen Rochel 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Pedro - this are indeed the draft release notes for v1.4.0. Please add
> > description as you suggested.
> >
> > All - please have a look at the release notes and provide feedback and
> > suggestions..
> > Steffen
> > On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 3:30 AM Zhao, Patric  wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Steffen,
> >>
> >> I saw the draft of 1.4 release notes in here (
> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Notes
> >> ).
> >>
> >> Is this near the final version?  I'd like to add some descriptions of new
> >> quantization features enabled in 1.4.
> >>
> >> Is it OK?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> --Patric
> >>
> >>
> >> > -Original Message-
> >> > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
> >> > Sent: Saturday, December 8, 2018 1:12 AM
> >> > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> >> > Subject: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
> >> >
> >> > Dear MXNet community -
> >> > I would like to provide update on v1.4.0 status, details are tracked
> >> here
> >> >  >> > ncubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Plan+and+Status>
> >> > .
> >> >
> >> > Thank you very much for everybody effort to resolve the identified
> >> issues.
> >> > We are down to 3 open issues - for details please see
> >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28in
> >> > cubating%29+1.
> >> > 4.0
> >> > +Release+Plan+and+Status#ApacheMXNet(incubating)1.4.0ReleasePlanandSt
> >> > atu
> >> > +Release+Plan+and+s-OpenPRstotrack
> >> >  >> > ncubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Plan+and+Status#ApacheMXNet(incubating)1.
> >> > 4.0ReleasePlanandStatus-OpenPRstotrack>
> >> > Please help to resolve the remaining issues and integrate to v1.4.x
> >> branch.
> >> > Current estimate to address the identified security vulnerabilities in
> >> the
> >> > Scala/Java package and merge into v1.4.x branch is end of next week
> >> > (December 14th) I will communicate as soon I have more information.
> >> >
> >> > Regards,
> >> > Steffen
> >>
> >

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Steffen Rochel]

Dear MXNet community -
all issues beside one
 have been
addressed. I suggest to document the last remaining issue as known problem
and move forward with the release.
Please communicate if you have concerns of know about critical issues to be
addressed before starting vote about releasing 1.4.0 as soon as possible.
Please also have a look at the release notes

and provide feedback.

I'm planing to start voting beginning of next week.
Steffen

On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 8:31 PM Steffen Rochel 
wrote:

> Hi Pedro - this are indeed the draft release notes for v1.4.0. Please add
> description as you suggested.
>
> All - please have a look at the release notes and provide feedback and
> suggestions..
> Steffen
> On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 3:30 AM Zhao, Patric  wrote:
>
>> Hi Steffen,
>>
>> I saw the draft of 1.4 release notes in here (
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Notes
>> ).
>>
>> Is this near the final version?  I'd like to add some descriptions of new
>> quantization features enabled in 1.4.
>>
>> Is it OK?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --Patric
>>
>>
>> > -Original Message-
>> > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
>> > Sent: Saturday, December 8, 2018 1:12 AM
>> > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
>> > Subject: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
>> >
>> > Dear MXNet community -
>> > I would like to provide update on v1.4.0 status, details are tracked
>> here
>> > > > ncubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Plan+and+Status>
>> > .
>> >
>> > Thank you very much for everybody effort to resolve the identified
>> issues.
>> > We are down to 3 open issues - for details please see
>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28in
>> > cubating%29+1.
>> > 4.0
>> > +Release+Plan+and+Status#ApacheMXNet(incubating)1.4.0ReleasePlanandSt
>> > atu
>> > +Release+Plan+and+s-OpenPRstotrack
>> > > > ncubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Plan+and+Status#ApacheMXNet(incubating)1.
>> > 4.0ReleasePlanandStatus-OpenPRstotrack>
>> > Please help to resolve the remaining issues and integrate to v1.4.x
>> branch.
>> > Current estimate to address the identified security vulnerabilities in
>> the
>> > Scala/Java package and merge into v1.4.x branch is end of next week
>> > (December 14th) I will communicate as soon I have more information.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Steffen
>>
>

Re: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Steffen Rochel]

Hi Pedro - this are indeed the draft release notes for v1.4.0. Please add
description as you suggested.

All - please have a look at the release notes and provide feedback and
suggestions..
Steffen
On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 3:30 AM Zhao, Patric  wrote:

> Hi Steffen,
>
> I saw the draft of 1.4 release notes in here (
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Notes
> ).
>
> Is this near the final version?  I'd like to add some descriptions of new
> quantization features enabled in 1.4.
>
> Is it OK?
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Patric
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, December 8, 2018 1:12 AM
> > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
> >
> > Dear MXNet community -
> > I would like to provide update on v1.4.0 status, details are tracked here
> >  > ncubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Plan+and+Status>
> > .
> >
> > Thank you very much for everybody effort to resolve the identified
> issues.
> > We are down to 3 open issues - for details please see
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28in
> > cubating%29+1.
> > 4.0
> > +Release+Plan+and+Status#ApacheMXNet(incubating)1.4.0ReleasePlanandSt
> > atu
> > +Release+Plan+and+s-OpenPRstotrack
> >  > ncubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Plan+and+Status#ApacheMXNet(incubating)1.
> > 4.0ReleasePlanandStatus-OpenPRstotrack>
> > Please help to resolve the remaining issues and integrate to v1.4.x
> branch.
> > Current estimate to address the identified security vulnerabilities in
> the
> > Scala/Java package and merge into v1.4.x branch is end of next week
> > (December 14th) I will communicate as soon I have more information.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Steffen
>

RE: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status

[Zhao, Patric]

Hi Steffen,

I saw the draft of 1.4 release notes in here 
(https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Notes).

Is this near the final version?  I'd like to add some descriptions of new 
quantization features enabled in 1.4.

Is it OK?

Thanks,

--Patric


> -Original Message-
> From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, December 8, 2018 1:12 AM
> To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Apache MXNet v1.4.0 release status
> 
> Dear MXNet community -
> I would like to provide update on v1.4.0 status, details are tracked here
>  ncubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Plan+and+Status>
> .
> 
> Thank you very much for everybody effort to resolve the identified issues.
> We are down to 3 open issues - for details please see
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28in
> cubating%29+1.
> 4.0
> +Release+Plan+and+Status#ApacheMXNet(incubating)1.4.0ReleasePlanandSt
> atu
> +Release+Plan+and+s-OpenPRstotrack
>  ncubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Plan+and+Status#ApacheMXNet(incubating)1.
> 4.0ReleasePlanandStatus-OpenPRstotrack>
> Please help to resolve the remaining issues and integrate to v1.4.x branch.
> Current estimate to address the identified security vulnerabilities in the
> Scala/Java package and merge into v1.4.x branch is end of next week
> (December 14th) I will communicate as soon I have more information.
> 
> Regards,
> Steffen