The main use of amalgamation(aka all in one file build) for cases where it is hard to setup a Make system. Most user knows how to include a single file into their project, but it is relatively harder to incorporate an entire build system.
As a result, all-in-one file runtime is still being quite widely used and I personally liked the approach, I just suggested that the current approach may not be the best way to go and creates some maintenance burden. See the link of an example project that uses new all-in-one approach that i mentioned(which illustrates the usecase of all-in-one file as well) https://github.com/dmlc/tvm/tree/master/apps/howto_deploy TQ On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 3:46 AM Marco de Abreu <marco.g.ab...@gmail.com> wrote: > Do we have a good knowledge and overview over all the use cases that use > Amalgamation? At least from my perspective I don't feel well informed about > the blast radius. > > -Marco > > Junru Shao <junrushao1...@gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 28. Sep. 2019, 09:14: > > > As Tianqi and Sheng mentioned, given the fact that we are able to do > > deployment in a possibly better way (correct me if I was wrong), I would > > love to +1 to Pedro’s proposal. > > > > In the meantime, as a healthy open source community, I also agree with > > Naveen’s point that we should do more homework for both our developers > and > > customers. IMHO, for example, it would be super helpful if Pedro may > bring > > up some documentation describing what is the “best practice” of using the > > alternative of amalgamation, if our community agree to deprecate it. > > > > Thank you guys so much for the discussion! > > > > Junru > > > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 17:00 Tianqi Chen <tqc...@cs.washington.edu> > > wrote: > > > > > The original amalgamation tries to generate a single file for > compilation > > > via a script. This is largely un-necessary, having a file that include > > the > > > dependent files and compile that one is relatively easy and sometimes > > more > > > robust(without expanding everything into a single file). > > > > > > I think it might makes sense to deprecate and remove the current one > > given > > > that it is no longer properly functioning. If someone is interested, > > create > > > another deployment example that is more standalone without the file > > > expansion. Here is an reference of the "new style" used in the tvm > > project > > > https://github.com/dmlc/tvm/tree/master/apps/howto_deploy > > > > > > TQ > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 4:49 PM Sheng Zha <zhash...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > As an alternative to amalgamation, could we simply ask users to > > > statically > > > > link to libmxnet.a, and then prune the symbol table to get rid of the > > > > binary of unused functions? Though I don't know the full context of > > > > amalgamation, based on my knowledge on this feature I'm not aware of > > any > > > > difference in the end result, compared to the code-inlining approach > > that > > > > amalgamation takes. > > > > > > > > -sz > > > > > > > > On 2019/09/12 17:29:02, Naveen Swamy <mnnav...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > so the original email suggesting to remove was after all > self-serving > > > :) > > > > > > > > > > let's encourage if someone wants to maintain and make use of the > > > original > > > > > work and make it better. > > > > > > > > > > -1 to remove at this point > > > > > > > > > > P.S: I suggest to do some due diligence before bringing topics up > for > > > > > discussion. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 8:10 AM Lv, Tao A <tao.a...@intel.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry to chime in. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is a PR to fix amalgamation. I was pinged several times to > > > merge > > > > it > > > > > > but I don't think I have enough knowledge to do that. So it would > > be > > > > great > > > > > > if someone from this thread can help to review. > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15303 > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks, > > > > > > -tao > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Marco de Abreu <marco.g.ab...@gmail.com> > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2019 9:38 PM > > > > > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org > > > > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Remove amalgamation > > > > > > > > > > > > Is Amalgamation only used on Android though? Are there any other > > use > > > > cases? > > > > > > > > > > > > -Marco > > > > > > > > > > > > Pedro Larroy <pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com> schrieb am Mi., 11. > > Sep. > > > > 2019, > > > > > > 11:57: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Anirudh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Appreciate your feedback and sorry if my email came across that > > way > > > > to > > > > > > > you, I think you might miss some context. I don't think calling > > > > > > > something hacky is anything bad and isn't supposed to be the > > topic > > > of > > > > > > > the discussion. It was reported as not working by users, hence > > the > > > > > > > original thread. It was a request for opinions from people who > > > might > > > > > > > actually have tried to work in Mxnet on Android. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pedro. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, September 10, 2019, Anirudh Subramanian > > > > > > > <anirudh2...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Pedro, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't see anything "destructive" with Chris asking for > > > > > > > > justification > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > you calling something "hacky". The only email in this thread > > > where > > > > I > > > > > > > > see > > > > > > > ad > > > > > > > > hominems and disrespectful comments is your email. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 7, 2019, 10:18 PM Pedro Larroy > > > > > > > > <pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Apache mentors should have a look at these reincident > > harassment > > > > > > > >> and destructive behaviors which demotivate contributions and > > > take > > > > > > > >> action. It takes only one bad apple to ruin a community. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> The mobile solution that is known to work as of know is > cross > > > > > > > >> compiling with "ci/build.py -p build.android_armv8" or > > > > > > > >> "build.android_armv7". The only advantage of amalgamation is > > to > > > > > > > >> provide a smaller binary that we > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > >> accomplish with the C preprocessor. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> My technical contributions speak for themselves, including > > > porting > > > > > > > >> MXNet > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > >> Android and ARM and helping many users run MXNet in Jetson, > > > > > > > >> Raspberry Pi and Android amongst many other topics. I have > > never > > > > > > > >> been disrespectful > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > >> anyone. I'm entitled to my own technical opinions about > > > > > > > >> amalgamation or > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > >> other piece of code whatsoever, that's no personal > disrespect > > to > > > > > > > >> anyone > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > >> perfectly valid. If you are not interested in this project > > > > anymore, > > > > > > > >> do > > > > > > > us > > > > > > > >> all a favor and stop trolling and being toxic. If you want > my > > > > > > > >> respect, > > > > > > > step > > > > > > > >> up your technical contributions, be positive and encourage > > > others, > > > > > > > >> this including commits, I haven't seen for many months, > please > > > be > > > > > > > >> positive > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > >> constructive. This scorched-earth attitude is only > reflecting > > > bad > > > > > > > >> on > > > > > > > you. > > > > > > > >> I'm certainly not interested in your ad-hominems or unasked > > for > > > > > > > technical > > > > > > > >> advice, which to be honest, showing poor judgment and > > > ignorance. > > > > > > > >> Myself and others have come up with numbers, graphs, metrics > > and > > > > > > > >> arguments and have been met with dismissal, trolling and > > > > > > > >> sea-lioning. I have recieved your insults via public and > > private > > > > > > > >> channels (such as linkedin) as have others. This is not ok > and > > > has > > > > > > > >> to stop. If you have something personal against me or > against > > > your > > > > > > > >> former employer, this is not the right place > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > >> forum. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 3:56 PM Chris Olivier > > > > > > > >> <cjolivie...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > Hi Pedro, > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > While I was not involved with amalgamation or its > > development > > > in > > > > > > > >> > any > > > > > > > way, > > > > > > > >> > can you please refrain from referring to the work of > others > > > as a > > > > > > > "hacky > > > > > > > >> > solution"? This is derogatory slang and the statement was > > not > > > > > > > supported > > > > > > > >> > with any justification for such name-calling. Someone > > spent a > > > > > > > >> > good > > > > > > > deal > > > > > > > >> of > > > > > > > >> > time on this solution at some point in time and I am sure > it > > > > > > > >> > worked > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > >> its > > > > > > > >> > purpose at that time -- I think it was used in the > original > > > > > > > >> > javascript > > > > > > > >> port > > > > > > > >> > as well, actually -- and it is disrespectful to call their > > > > > > > >> > efforts "hacky". Please respect what came before. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > Thanks for understanding, > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > -Chris > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 3:07 PM Pedro Larroy < > > > > > > > >> pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > >> > wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > Hi > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > I would like to propose to remove amalgamation from > MXNet > > > and > > > > > > > >> > > CI, > > > > > > > users > > > > > > > >> > > have reported that they couldn't use it successfully in > > > > > > > >> > > Android, and instead they were able to use the cross > > > compiled > > > > > > > >> > > docker build > > > > > > > >> > successfully. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > Any reason why we shouldn't remove this hacky solution? > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > Pedro. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
