Re: Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

Thanks Yizhi. Thanks Justin for super helpful feedbacks! Please let us know if you have further suggestions. We plan to start a formal vote in a day if things are OK(of course the rc will be moved to the dist server). TQ On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 7:59 PM YiZhi Liu wrote: > Thanks Justin and

Re: Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

Thanks Justin and Tianqi. RC2 is created with the fixes, https://github.com/apache/incubator-tvm/releases/tag/v0.6.0.rc2 On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 2:52 PM Tianqi Chen wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 2:43 PM Justin Mclean > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > The license [3] actually provides three

Re: Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 2:43 PM Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > > The license [3] actually provides three licenses. The legacy section of > > the license indicate that the file is also licensed under MIT and > > University of Illinois/NCSA. > > Forgot to say this isn’t a case of dual licensing,

Re: Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

Hi, > The license [3] actually provides three licenses. The legacy section of > the license indicate that the file is also licensed under MIT and > University of Illinois/NCSA. Forgot to say this isn’t a case of dual licensing, in this case all licenses apply to different bits of the code, so

Re: Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

Hi, That all sound good to me. > Although the driver file itself is MIT, because linux kernel driver has a > policy that open source driver has to be dual licensed to GPL, the driver > declaration declared the binary module as GPL. That explains it, and it would be fine to include it. For

Re: Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

Thanks Justin, these are super helpful! We will address these problems as follows, please let us know if you have additional suggestions - NOTICE is still incorrect > We will change "2019 and onwards" to "2019". - I did notice a directory called "3rdparty/dlpack/apps/from_numpy” is this > code

Re: Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

Hi, I checked: - incubating in name - signatures and hashes fine - DISCLAIMER exists - LICENSE looks good - NOTICE is still incorrect - No unexpected binary files Some minor issues/questions: - I did notice a directory called "3rdparty/dlpack/apps/from_numpy” is this code from numpy? - This

Re: Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

Thanks Justin for providing helpful feedbacks! and thanks Yizhi for making the improvement and bringing another RC. The community did another pass over the licenses and addressed Justin's note and made a sweep of the codebase to remove all the un-necessary copyright messages(including those that

Re: Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

Hi Justin, Many thanks to your help. We just addressed the issues and created another [RC](https://github.com/apache/incubator-tvm/releases/tag/0.6.0.rc1). Would you mind check whether it is in good shape? We highly appreciate your patience and guidance. Thanks, Yizhi On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at

Re: Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

Hi, > Looks for copyrights inside the files, file with ASF header should have no > copyright lines. Well ones donated to the ASF anyway. Thanks, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For

Re: Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

Hi, > for ./3rdparty/compiler-rt/builtin_fp16.h , from > [here](https://github.com/llvm-mirror/compiler-rt/blob/master/LICENSE.TXT#L240-L241 > > ) > it says it was dual licensed under University of Illinois and the

Re: Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

Re LLVM’s license issue. I believe MIT is a safer choice for compiler-rt before we confirm with ASF. Because strictly LLVM’s apache license comes with an exemption Clause which needs to be reviewed. Given that the code is also dual licensed under MIT, we should take that as a safer choice until

Re: Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

Hi Justin, for ./3rdparty/compiler-rt/builtin_fp16.h , from [here](https://github.com/llvm-mirror/compiler-rt/blob/master/LICENSE.TXT#L240-L241) it says it was dual licensed under University of Illinois and the MIT license, though the current LICENSE file declares ALv2. I believe the

Re: Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

Thanks Justin for helping, we'll make modification accordingly. On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 2:15 PM Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi, > > I checked the release candidate further: > - Signatures and hashes good > - DISCLAIMER exists > - LICENSE is missing a few things > - NOTICE needs some minor

Re: Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

Hi, I checked the release candidate further: - Signatures and hashes good - DISCLAIMER exists - LICENSE is missing a few things - NOTICE needs some minor adjustments - Some files are missing ASF headers e.g. [1][2][3][4][5] (+ others) - Some files incorrectly have an ASF headers or have ASF lines

Re: Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

Thanks Justin! This is exactly kind of feedback we are looking for. The community would like to hold the release to the highest possible standard, which means we would like to make sure the release meet the criteria of the standard disclaimer. We will look into the compatibility issue of LLVM

Re: Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

Hi, I’ve not had an extensive look but I note this license in your license file: LLVM Release License While a BSD style license (I think) it not listen in Apaches list of compatible licenses. You’ll also note it include other 3rd party licensed buts of software, these would need to be checked

Help Verify Apache(incubating) TVM Release RC

Dear IPMC: I am sending this email to let you know that the Apache (incubating) TVM community started a formal RFC for our first apache release. Because this is our first ASF release, the community wanted to hold the release to the highest standard possible, by starting an RFC to ask everyone to