* For pypi, we can use mirrors. On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 9:28 PM Tao Lv <mutou...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As we have many users in China, I'm considering the accessibility of S3. > For pip, we can mirrors. > > On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 3:24 PM Lausen, Leonard <lau...@amazon.com.invalid> > wrote: > >> I would like to remind everyone that lazy consensus is assumed if no >> objections >> are raised before 2019-12-05 at 05:42 UTC. There has been some discussion >> about >> the proposal, but to my understanding no objections were raised. >> >> If the proposal is accepted, MXNet releases would be installed via >> >> pip install mxnet >> >> And release candidates via >> >> pip install --pre mxnet >> >> (or with the respective cuda version specifier appended etc.) >> >> To obtain releases built automatically from the master branch, users >> would need >> to specify something like "-f >> http://mxnet.s3.amazonaws.com/mxnet-X/nightly.html"; option to pip. >> >> Best regards >> Leonard >> >> On Mon, 2019-12-02 at 05:42 +0000, Lausen, Leonard wrote: >> > Hi MXNet Community, >> > >> > since more than 2 months our binary Python nightly releases published >> on Pypi >> > are broken. The problem is that our binaries exceed Pypi's size limit. >> > Decreasing the binary size by adding compression breaks third-party >> libraries >> > loading libmxnet.so >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/16193 >> > >> > Sheng requested Pypi to increase their size limit: >> > https://github.com/pypa/pypi-support/issues/50 >> > >> > Currently "the biggest cost for PyPI from [the many MXNet binaries with >> > nightly >> > release to Pypi] is the bandwidth consumed when several hundred mirrors >> > attempt >> > to mirror each release immediately after it's published". So Pypi is not >> > inclined to allow us to upload even larger binaries on a nightly >> schedule. >> > Their compromise is to allow it on a weekly cadence. >> > >> > However, I would like the community to revisit the necessity of >> releasing pre- >> > release binaries to Pypi on a nightly (or weekly) cadence. Instead, we >> can >> > release nightly binaries ONLY to a public S3 bucket and instruct users >> to >> > install from there. On our side, we only need to prepare a html >> document that >> > contains links to all released nightly binaries. >> > Finally users will install the nightly releases via >> > >> > pip install --pre mxnet-cu101 -f >> http://mxnet.s3.amazonaws.com/mxnet-cu101/ >> > nightly.html >> > >> > Instead of >> > >> > pip install --pre mxnet-cu101 >> > >> > Of course proper releases and release candidates should still be made >> > available >> > via Pypi. Thus releases would be installed via >> > >> > pip install mxnet-cu101 >> > >> > And release candidates via >> > >> > pip install --pre mxnet-cu101 >> > >> > This will substantially reduce the costs of the Pypi project and in fact >> > matches >> > the installation experience provided by PyTorch. I don't think the >> benefit of >> > not including "-f >> http://mxnet.s3.amazonaws.com/mxnet-cu101/nightly.html"; >> > matches the costs we currently externalize to the Pypi team. >> > >> > This suggestion seems uncontroversial to me. Thus I would like to start >> lazy >> > consensus. If there are no objections, I will assume lazy consensus on >> > stopping >> > nightly releases to Pypi in 72hrs. >> > >> > Best regards >> > Leonard >> >
