Is there any other PR that fails because of those tests? Can you reproduce the failure without your PR? It seems pretty strange to me to disable a test if there is no explanation of why the test failure is unrelated to the PR...
On 2019/10/07 20:35:33, Anirudh Acharya <anirudhk...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Sam, Lin and Chaitanya, > > I am sorry I am not aware of anyone who is willing to actively maintain the > ONNX module. The last commit was made by https://github.com/vandanavk. I am > not sure how much time vandanavk@ can dedicate to this. > > I am okay with what the community collectively decides on these tests( > enabling or disabling). The purpose of my previous mail was to let the > community know that there are users of the ONNX module and that there is > some activity regarding code changes in that module. > > > Thanks > Anirudh > > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 1:19 PM Skalicky, Sam <sska...@amazon.com.invalid> > wrote: > > > Hi Chai, > > > > If there is no one maintaining MXNet-ONNX support (or no one currently > > available to help debug issues), then we shouldn’t block forward progress > > because of failing ONNX tests. > > > > It would be great if someone wanted to work with Chai to debug the failing > > tests. But I do not see any forward plans/proposals to continue to develop > > or even just maintain the current ONNX support. > > > > Anirudh, if you can point those who are willing to maintain the ONNX > > support to the issue Chai mentioned that would be a good place to start. > > But if not, we should help Chai continue the great work he’s doing by > > disabling the failing tests (like we normally do for any failing/flaky > > tests already) > > > > Sam > > > > > On Oct 7, 2019, at 12:45 PM, Anirudh Acharya <anirudhk...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Chaitanya, > > > > > > The last I checked( a couple of months back) there are a few > > > customers/users of MXNet in Amazon who use ONNX in production. > > > > > > The last commit for ONNX module was on Aug 29th > > > - b7cca015553d707cd1c4ce292826d7311309419c > > > > > > So IMO disabling any of the tests is not a good idea. > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > Anirudh > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 12:27 PM Chaitanya Bapat <chai.ba...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hello MXNet community, > > >> > > >> I wanted to know if MXNet should continue support for ONNX. Is there > > anyone > > >> actively working on MXNet ONNX or maintaining it? > > >> > > >> If not, can we skip/disable the ONNX tests from the CI. > > >> Reason - Whilst working on a Transpose operator PR [1], I encountered > > >> failure for ONNX [2]. Given operator passes rest of the CI pipeline > > tests. > > >> I am able to reproduce the error. However, the root cause for ONNX model > > >> failure couldn't be found. Moreover, there seems to be near zero > > activity > > >> as far as PR check-ins are concerned. > > >> > > >> How does ONNX fit in for MXNet going forward? > > >> Thank you > > >> Chai > > >> > > >> > > >> [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16104 > > >> [2] > > >> > > >> > > http://jenkins.mxnet-ci.amazon-ml.com/blue/organizations/jenkins/mxnet-validation%2Funix-cpu/detail/PR-16104/14/pipeline > > >> > > >> -- > > >> *Chaitanya Prakash Bapat* > > >> *+1 (973) 953-6299* > > >> > > >> [image: https://www.linkedin.com//in/chaibapat25] > > >> <https://github.com/ChaiBapchya>[image: > > https://www.facebook.com/chaibapat > > >> ] > > >> <https://www.facebook.com/chaibapchya>[image: > > >> https://twitter.com/ChaiBapchya] <https://twitter.com/ChaiBapchya > > >[image: > > >> https://www.linkedin.com//in/chaibapat25] > > >> <https://www.linkedin.com//in/chaibapchya/> > > >> > > > > >
