Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi, > Thank you Justin for your inputs and explanation ! I really appreciate your > efforts to evaluate the release. I will extend the vote till Monday 12:00 > PM PDT (if its permitted) to see what other IPMC members have to say about > category b content in the release. Votes last for a minimum

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Thank you Justin for your inputs and explanation ! I really appreciate your efforts to evaluate the release. I will extend the vote till Monday 12:00 PM PDT (if its permitted) to see what other IPMC members have to say about category b content in the release. Anirudh On Sat, May 12, 2018 at

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi, > I think we should be good to add the header for Apache v2.0 license: >> src/operator/contrib/ctc_include/detail/cpu_ctc.h >> src/operator/contrib/ctc_include/detail/ctc_helper.h >> src/operator/contrib/ctc_include/detail/gpu_ctc.h >> src/operator/contrib/ctc_include/detail/gpu_ctc_kernels.h

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi Justin, Thank you! They were first added as part of this PR: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/5834. As you can see there is a LICENSE in src/operator/contrib/ctc_include which is Apache v2.0 license. I am assuming that the intention was to keep the license of files in the

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi, > In contrib/, I found a few files which don't have a license or have a > license but not the full text: > src/operator/contrib/psroi_pooling-inl.h > src/operator/contrib/ctc_include/detail/cpu_ctc.h > src/operator/contrib/ctc_include/detail/ctc_helper.h >

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi, > We cannot just remove the documentation without modifying the original > repo, since it is a submodule. Just remove the file as part of the build script? > I have opened an issue to googletest to see if it can be relicensed: > https://github.com/google/googletest/issues/1604 > Is this

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi Justin, I looked at the big directories that were omitted in the RAT excludes file: contrib/* and docs/*. In contrib/, I found a few files which don't have a license or have a license but not the full text: src/operator/contrib/psroi_pooling-inl.h

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi Hen, Sorry I misunderstood. The doc can definitely be removed from release when doing tar.gz build. I for some reason was thinking about the release tag on github. Anirudh On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 6:05 PM, Hen wrote: > I'll poke the legal-discuss thread; however why can't

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

I'll poke the legal-discuss thread; however why can't we have the build script for the tar.gz start by removing the .md file? On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 5:35 PM, Anirudh wrote: > Hi Justin, > > We cannot just remove the documentation without modifying the original > repo,

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi Justin, We cannot just remove the documentation without modifying the original repo, since it is a submodule. I have opened an issue to googletest to see if it can be relicensed: https://github.com/google/googletest/issues/1604 Is this acceptable for the release? For issue 1 and 2, is the

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi, My reading of that is the documentation is under a CC license and the code under a different one. That's quite common. You could just not include the documentation. Thanks, Justin On Sat., 12 May 2018, 9:48 am Anirudh, wrote: > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 3:57 PM, Justin

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 3:57 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > > For 1 and 2, Considering that the Creative Commons License files aren't > > part of the release source itself but downloaded when user calls some > > specific api or runs some script, would these be

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi, > For 1 and 2, Considering that the Creative Commons License files aren't > part of the release source itself but downloaded when user calls some > specific api or runs some script, would these be blocking issues ? No but this need to explicitly pointed out to the user that they are

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi, > Just to make sure I understand: Do you want us to review rat-excludes file > to make sure we are not omitting important ? We will check the rat-excludes > file. > Also, the huge number of files(when run without rat-excludes) is because of > the third party submodules for whom the licenses

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi Justin, I have a few questions on the category b issues that you raised: 1. example/nce-loss/README.md: This script doesn't ship with CC-BY-SA and GFDL content by itself but downloads the dataset when user runs the script example/nce-loss/get_text8.sh. 2.

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi Justin, Just to make sure I understand: Do you want us to review rat-excludes file to make sure we are not omitting important ? We will check the rat-excludes file. Also, the huge number of files(when run without rat-excludes) is because of the third party submodules for whom the licenses have

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi, > I am not able to reproduce the issue you mentioned with unknown licenses. > When I try to run apache rat on the downloaded source it says 0 unknown > licenses. Does the source you are looking at include build artifacts by > chance ? No it wasn't but I was ignoring the rat exclusions.

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi Justin, Thanks a lot for the feedback! I will take a look at license issues and also publish my key to the public keyserver. I am not able to reproduce the issue you mentioned with unknown licenses. When I try to run apache rat on the downloaded source it says 0 unknown licenses. Does the

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi, Sorry but it’s -1 binding as issues raised last incubator vote haven’t been fixed and the source release include Category B content. [2] I checked: - incubating in name - DISCLAIMER exists - In LICENSE if you link to the license eg "For details, see, 3rdparty/googletest/googletest/LICENSE”

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi Henri, Thank you for your kind words! Really appreciate you and Sebastian checking the release. Anirudh On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 12:52 AM, Hen wrote: > +1. > > Reviewed diff between 1.1.0 and 1.2.0 source releases for anything unusual. > Sampled new files in 1.2.0 for

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

+1. Reviewed diff between 1.1.0 and 1.2.0 source releases for anything unusual. Sampled new files in 1.2.0 for source headers. Happy to see the dmlc code folded into 3rd-party so it's clearer for users/reviewers. Good patient release-managering btw with all those side-issues on the vote thread

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

+1 (binding) verified build from source on ubuntu 16.04 Best, Sebastian On 08.05.2018 19:36, Anirudh wrote: Hi all, This is a call for releasing Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0, release candidate RC2. Apache MXNet (incubating) community has voted and approved the release. Vote thread:

[VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0 release RC2

Hi all, This is a call for releasing Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.2.0, release candidate RC2. Apache MXNet (incubating) community has voted and approved the release. Vote thread: