One more thing, I wonder if we should remove 3rdparty/mkldnn/doc to overcome the license problem mentioned in 1.8 vote [1].
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rf809c7b700d4523f73f8b376ce106719fbf000eff898b5ed8e97b486%40%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E On 2021/02/20 21:57:09, Sheng Zha <[email protected]> wrote: > +1, built from source and tested with GluonNLP ELECTRA pretraining script. > > While examining the license file I noticed some issues that we should > probably fix: > - ![n] Un-included software dependencies are not mentioned in LICENSE or > NOTICE? File 3rdparty/tvm/3rdparty/bfloat16/bfloat16.cc does not exist > - ![n] Does the software have a compatible license? Release contains OFL > which should not be used. mxtheme issue tracked in #19873 though it will take > some time. > > We should fix the first issue in the LICENSE and mention the second as known > issue in disclaimer. Because the rest looks good and these issues are minor, > I recommend amending them in the release tag and release file instead of > going through another vote. > > In addition I checked the following items: > [y] Are release files in correct location? > [y] Do release files have the word incubating in their name? > [y] Are the digital signature and hashes correct? > [y] Does DISCLAIMER file exist? Yes, DISCLAIMER-WIP is used. > [y] Do LICENSE and NOTICE files exists? > [y] Is the LICENSE and NOTICE text correct? > [y] Is the NOTICE year correct? > [y] License information is not mentioned in NOTICE? > > Is there any 3rd party code contained inside the release? If so: > [y] Are all software licenses mentioned in LICENSE? > [y] Is the full text of the licenses (or pointers to it) in LICENSE? > Is any of this code Apache licensed? Do they have NOTICE files? If so: > [y] Have relevant parts of those NOTICE files been added to > this NOTICE file? > [y] Do all source files have ASF headers? > > [y] Do the contents of the release match with what's tagged in version > control? > [n] Are there any unexpected binary files in the release? > [y] Can you compile from source? Are the instruction clear? > Is the issue minor? > [y] Yes [ ] No [ ] Unsure > Could it possibly be fixed in the next release? > [y] Yes [ ] No [ ] Unsure > > I vote with: > [y] +1 release the software > [ ] +0 not sure if it should be released > [ ] -1 don’t release the software because... > > Thanks, > Sheng > > On 2021/02/17 22:30:36, Leonard Lausen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear MXNet community, > > > > This is the vote to release Apache MXNet (incubating) version > > 2.0.0.alpha.rc3. > > Voting will start now and close on February 21 2021 end of day (PT). > > > > Compared to rc2, this rc3 contains a fix for systems without MKL when users > > don't > > specify USE_BLAS build argument, performance optimization for multi-tensor > > zeroing, fixes for floating point exceptions in edge cases as well as a fix > > for > > the quantization example. > > > > Note that this is an Alpha release, which represents our first project > > milestone > > on the road to MXNet 2 and is intended for bleeding-edge developers working > > outside the project. [1] > > > > Link to MXNet 2 RFC: > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/16167 > > > > Link to source and signatures on Github: > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/releases/tag/v2.0.0.alpha.rc3 > > > > Link to source and signatures on Apache dist server: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/mxnet/2.0.0.alpha.rc3/ > > > > Please remember to TEST first before voting accordingly: > > > > +1 = approve > > +0 = no opinion > > -1 = disapprove (provide reason) > > > > Best regards, > > Leonard Lausen > > > > [1]: http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html > > > > > > > > > > > > >
