I fixed the jar issue, also synced offline with Chris on slack Tianqi
On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Chris Olivier <cjolivie...@gmail.com> wrote: > It is mentioned in the -1 email we got for rc0 release: > > Hi, > > -1 binding due to license, header issues and having a compiled jar in a > source release. > > I checked: > - incubating in name > - signatures and hashes correct > - DISCLAIMER exists > - LICENSE has issues (see below) I also note that license issues brought up > last time have not all been addressed. [22] > - NOTICE seem rather brief considering the number of Apache licensed > inclusion do any of them have NOTICE files? > - A number of source file are missing license headers e.g. [15][16] [18] > [19] and many others > - A number of source look to have had the ASF header incorrectly added. > - Binary included in source release [20] Note there’s an unresolved legal > issue about this [21] > > Have you run rat on this release it would of help pick up most of these > issues? > > In this file [1] there’s a copyright notice but it also has an ASF header > which is a little odd. This also occurs in a number of other places. > > This file [2] also look to incorrectly have an ASF header and it’s unclear > how the original code is licensed. From a quick like their seems to be many > files that incorrectly have ASF headers on them e.g. [5][6][7] > [10][12][13][14] and others. > > This file [3] (and others) looks to come from the TVM project which is not > mentioned in license. > > The license for this file [4] is missing from license. > > The link for JQuery [8] is missing from the license. Also missing license > for these files [9][11][17] and probably others. > > At this point I gave up so there may be other issues. > > It also a good idea to publish your keys: > gpg: assuming signed data in 'apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0- > incubating.tar.gz' > gpg: Signature made Sat 25 Nov 07:48:02 2017 AEDT > gpg: using RSA key 80FD81D7703DF31B > gpg: requesting key 80FD81D7703DF31B from hkps server > hkps.pool.sks-keyservers.net > gpg: Can't check signature: No public key > > It’s also a good idea to sign with an apache email address rather than a > gmail one. > > I’m also curious about “CODEOWNERS” file as that doesn’t seem to fit with > any Apache model I’m aware of. > > In “CONTRIBUTORS” there’s a long list of contributors - are their plan to > make any of these people committers? > > Thanks, > Justin > > 1. ./apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/perl-package/AI-MXNe > t/lib/AI/MXNet.pm > 2. ./apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/example/image-classi > fication/predict-cpp/image-classification-predict.cc > 3. ./apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/nnvm/tvm/src/op/op_util.cc > 4. ./apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/docs/_static/searcht > ools_custom.js > 5. ./apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/src/operator/nn/pool.h > 6. ./apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/src/operator/contrib > /nn/deformable_im2col.h > 7. ./apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/src/operator/contrib > /psroi_pooling-inl.h > 8. ./apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/docs/_static/jquery-1.11.1.js > 9. ./apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/cub/test/mersenne.h > 10. ./apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/cmake/Modules/ > FindJeMalloc.cmake > 11. ./apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/dmlc-core/cmake/Modu > les/FindCrypto.cmake > 12. ./apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/example/speech-demo/ > decode_mxnet.sh > 13. ./apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/example/speech-demo/ > io_func/convert2kaldi.py > 14. ./apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/src/operator/special > _functions-inl.h > 15. apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/example/rnn/bucket_R/rnn.train.R > 16. apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/tests/travis/r_vignettes.R > 17. apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/matlab/+mxnet/ > private/parse_json.m > 18 apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/ps-lite/tests/test_simple_app.cc > 19. apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/dmlc-core/tracker/yarn > /src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/yarn/dmlc/ApplicationMaster.java > 20. ./apache-mxnet-src-1.0.0.rc0-incubating/nnvm/tvm/apps/androi > d_rpc/gradle/wrapper/gradle-wrapper.jar > 21. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-288 > 22. https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/7749 > > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Tianqi Chen <tqc...@cs.washington.edu> > wrote: > > > OK, let me clarify this. NNVM now contains two part of the library, to > > facilitate the migration. > > > > - NNVM core library, which does not depend on tvm, and is what MXNet > using > > now. > > - NNVM compiler, which depends on core library and tvm. > > > > So to build MXNet binary, you can simply use the current source tree, > > without worrying whether TVM submodule is in source or not. You do not > have > > to ship binaries that are in TVM. > > > > I do not recall any discussion in terms of licensing problem of TVM. as > far > > as I know it is Apache and follows the same license structure as nnvm > did, > > so if you want to ship tvm source, please let me know what the problem is > > and we can work to fix that > > > > Tianqi > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 4:44 PM Gautam <gautamn...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > MXNet-1.0 depends on nnvm @ 8d79cfd > > > <https://github.com/dmlc/nnvm/tree/8d79cfd0b42fbe9f6ad75886d49506 > > > 5d5500b9dd> > > > which has TVM related commits. > > > > > > So one of the solution could be to go back in nnvm which doesn't > include > > > TVM. > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Tianqi Chen <tqc...@cs.washington.edu > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I mean Mxnet is not using tvm as a direct dependency. The support is > > > being > > > > done in nnvm compiler, which is not part of the release > > > > > > > > Tianqi > > > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 4:39 PM Tianqi Chen < > tqc...@cs.washington.edu> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > As far as i know Mxnet is not using tvm for now. So you can simply > > not > > > > > ship that jar > > > > > > > > > > Tianqi > > > > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 4:38 PM Chris Olivier < > cjolivie...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> tvm has a jar in it that (along with other things) is blocking 1,0 > > > > >> release. > > > > >> Can someone on tvm team please address this? > > > > >> > > > > >> Also, is mxnet 1.0 using tvm now? I don't recall this being > > discussed > > > > at > > > > >> all on dev@. If not, why is it in there? There's no licensing > > > > references > > > > >> as well, which is problematic. Is it necessary for 1.0? > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Best Regards, > > > Gautam Kumar > > > > > >
