Thats a good idea Leonard, we can have a static html page in the bucket for this. But keep in mind pip wheels do have a COMMIT_HASH file packaged inside. So we can always figure out which commit/build a user has by dumping this file from the mxnet installation. File name of the pip wheel is not so important.
Sam > On Jan 6, 2020, at 10:19 AM, Lausen, Leonard <lau...@amazon.com.INVALID> > wrote: > > Consider a user finds a bug in a nightly version but we can't narrow down the > version of mxnet used as the name is constant over time. Or users wan't to > revert back to the previous nightly version installed but don't know which > date > it was from due to constant name. > > Instead I suggest we introduce an autogenerated page like > https://download.pytorch.org/whl/nightly/cu101/torch_nightly.html > > Then "pip install -f URLTOPAGE mxnet" will install the latest available > version. > Maybe the team maintaining the S3 bucket can reconsider creating such page for > the intermediate time until the CD based nighlty build is operating. > > On Mon, 2020-01-06 at 10:01 -0800, Lin Yuan wrote: >> +1 for a nightly pip with fixed name. >> >> We need this to track mxnet integration with other packages such as Horovod. >> >> Sam, when do you think we can have this nightly build with a fixed name? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Lin >> >> On Sun, Jan 5, 2020 at 7:48 PM Skalicky, Sam <sska...@amazon.com.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Tao, >>> >>> We dont have this yet, but we did think about putting the latest wheels in >>> a specific place in the s3 bucket so they are always updated. Initially we >>> decided not to do this since the main MXNet CD should have been fixed. But >>> since its still not fixed yet, we might try and go ahead and do this. >>> >>> Sam >>> >>> On Jan 5, 2020, at 6:02 PM, Lv, Tao A <tao.a...@intel.com<mailto: >>> tao.a...@intel.com>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> How to install the latest available build of a flavor without specifying >>> the build date? Something like `pip install mxnet --pre`. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> -tao >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Skalicky, Sam <sska...@amazon.com.INVALID<mailto: >>> sska...@amazon.com.INVALID>> >>> Sent: Monday, January 6, 2020 2:09 AM >>> To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org<mailto:dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org> >>> Subject: Re: Stopping nightly releases to Pypi >>> >>> Hi Haibin, >>> >>> You typed the correct URLs, the cu100 build has been failing since >>> December 30th but other builds have succeeded. The wheels are being >>> delivered into a public bucket that anyone with an AWS account can access >>> and go poke around, here’s the URL for web access: >>> >>> >>> https://s3.console.aws.amazon.com/s3/buckets/apache-mxnet/dist/2020-01-01/dist/?region=us-west-2&tab=overview >>> >>> You will have to log into your AWS account to access it however (which >>> means you’ll need an AWS account). >>> >>> It looks like only the following flavors are available for 2020-01-01: >>> mxnet >>> mxnet-cu92 >>> mxnet-cu92mkl >>> mxnet-mkl >>> >>> Sam >>> >>> On Jan 4, 2020, at 9:06 PM, Haibin Lin <haibin.lin....@gmail.com<mailto: >>> haibin.lin....@gmail.com><mailto:haibin.lin....@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> I was trying the nightly builds, but none of them is available: >>> >>> pip3 install >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-01/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200101-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> --user >>> < >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-01/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200101-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl--user >>>> >>> pip3 install >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-02/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200102-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> --user >>> < >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-02/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200102-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl--user >>>> >>> pip3 install >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-03/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200103-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> --user >>> < >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-03/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200103-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl--user >>>> >>> pip3 install >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-04/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200104-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> --user >>> < >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-04/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200104-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl--user >>>> >>> >>> ERROR: Could not install requirement mxnet-cu100==1.6.0b20200103 from >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-03/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200103-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> because of HTTP error 404 Client Error: Not Found for url: >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-03/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200103-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> for URL >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-03/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200103-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> >>> Please let me know if I typed wrong URLs. >>> >>> 1. The discoverability of available nightly builds needs improvement. If >>> someone can help write a script to list all links that exist, that would be >>> very helpful. >>> 2. If any nightly build is not built successfully, how do the community >>> know the reason of the failure, and potentially offer helps? Currently I >>> don't have much visibility of the nightly build status. >>> >>> Best, >>> Haibin >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 5:47 PM Pedro Larroy <pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Just to clarify, the current CI is quite an overhead to maintain for >>> several reasons, this complexity is overkill for CD. Jenkins also has >>> constant plugin upgrades, security vulnerabilities, has to be restarted >>> from time to time as it stops working... and to make binary builds from an >>> environment which runs unsafe code, I don't think is good practice. So for >>> that, having a separate Jenkins, CodeBuild, Drone or using a separate >>> Jenkins node is the right solution. Agree with you that is just a >>> scheduler, but somebody is making efforts to keep it running. If you have >>> the appetite and resources to duplicate it for CD please go ahead. >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 3:25 PM Marco de Abreu <marco.g.ab...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:marco.g.ab...@gmail.com>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Regarding your point of finding somebody to maintain the solution: At >>> Apache we usually retire things if there's no maintainer, since that >>> indicates that the feature/system is not of enough interest to warrant >>> maintenance - otherwise, someone would step up. >>> >>> While assistance in the form of a fix is always appreciated, the fix still >>> has to conform with the way this project and Apache operates. Next time I'd >>> recommend to contribute time on improving the existing community solution >>> instead of developing an internal system. >>> >>> -Marco >>> >>> Marco de Abreu <marco.g.ab...@gmail.com<mailto:marco.g.ab...@gmail.com>> >>> schrieb am Sa., 4. Jan. 2020, >>> 00:21: >>> >>> Sam, while I understand that this solution was developed out of necessity, >>> my question why a new system has been developed instead of fixing the >>> existing one or adapting the solution. CodeBuild is a scheduler in the same >>> fashion as Jenkins is. It runs code. So you can adapt it to Jenkins without >>> much hassle. >>> >>> I'm not volunteering for this - why should I? The role of a PMC member is >>> to steer the direction of the project. Just because a manager points >>> towards a certain direction, if doesn't mean that they're going to do it. >>> >>> Apparently there was enough time at some point to develop a new solution >>> from scratch. It might have been a solution for your internal team and >>> that's fine, but upgrading it "temporarily" to be the advertised way on the >>> official website is something different. >>> >>> I won't argue about how the veto can be enforced. I think it's in the best >>> interest of the project if we try working on a solution instead of spending >>> time on trying to figure out the power of the PMC. >>> >>> Pedro, that's certainly a step towards the right direction. But committers >>> would also need access to the control plane of the system - to trigger, >>> stop and audit builds. We could go down that road, but i think the fewer >>> systems, the better - also for the sake of maintainability. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Marco >>> >>> >>> >>> Pedro Larroy <pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com<mailto: >>> pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com>> schrieb am Fr., 3. Jan. >>> 2020, >>> 20:55: >>> >>> I'm not involved in such efforts, but one possibility is to have the yaml >>> files that describe the pipelines for CD in the Apache repositories, would >>> that be acceptable from the Apache POV? In the end they should be very thin >>> and calling the scripts that are part of the CD packages. >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 6:56 AM Marco de Abreu < marco.g.ab...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:marco.g.ab...@gmail.com>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Agree, but the question how a non Amazonian is able to maintain and access >>> the system is still open. As it stands right now, the community has taken a >>> step back and loses some control if we continue down that road. >>> >>> I personally am disapproving of that approach since committers are no >>> longer in control of that process. So far it seems like my questions were >>> skipped and further actions have been taken. As openness and the community >>> having control are part of our graduation criteria, I'm putting in my veto >>> with a grace period until 15th of January. Please bring the system into a >>> state that aligns with Apache values or revert the changes. >>> >>> -Marco >>> >>> Pedro Larroy <pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com<mailto: >>> pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com>> schrieb am Fr., 3. Jan. >>> 2020, >>> 03:33: >>> >>> CD should be separate from CI for security reasons in any case. >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 7, 2019 at 10:04 AM Marco de Abreu < marco.g.ab...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:marco.g.ab...@gmail.com>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Could you elaborate how a non-Amazonian is able to access, maintain and >>> review the CodeBuild pipeline? How come we've diverted from the community >>> agreed-on standard where the public Jenkins serves for the purpose of >>> testing and releasing MXNet? I'd be curious about the issues you're >>> encountering with Jenkins CI that led to a non-standard solution. >>> >>> -Marco >>> >>> >>> Skalicky, Sam <sska...@amazon.com.invalid<mailto: >>> sska...@amazon.com.invalid>> schrieb am Sa., 7. >>> Dez. >>> 2019, >>> 18:39: >>> >>> Hi MXNet Community, >>> >>> We have been working on getting nightly builds fixed and made available >>> again. We’ve made another system using AWS CodeBuild & S3 to work around >>> the problems with Jenkins CI, PyPI, etc. It is currently building all the >>> flavors and publishing to an S3 bucket here: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://us-west-2.console.aws.amazon.com/s3/buckets/apache-mxnet/dist/?region=us-west-2 >>> >>> There are folders for each set of nightly builds, try out the wheels >>> starting today 2019-12-07. Builds start at 1:30am PT (9:30am >>> GMT) >>> and >>> arrive in the bucket 30min-2hours later. Inside each folder are the wheels >>> for each flavor of MXNet. Currently we’re only building for linux, builds >>> for windows/Mac will come later. >>> >>> If you want to download the wheels easily you can use a URL in the form >>> of: >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> <YYYY-MM-DD>/dist/<mxnet_build>-1.6.0b<YYYYMMDD>-py2.py3-none- >>> manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> >>> Heres a set of links for today’s builds >>> >>> (Plain mxnet, no mkl no cuda) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> (mxnet-mkl >>> < >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl(mxnet-mkl >>>> >>> < >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl(mxnet-mkl >>> >>> ) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> (mxnet-cuXXX >>> < >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl(mxnet-cuXXX >>>> >>> < >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl(mxnet-cuXXX >>> >>> ) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu90-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu92-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu101-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> (mxnet-cuXXXmkl >>> < >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu101-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl(mxnet-cuXXXmkl >>>> >>> < >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu101-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl(mxnet-cuXXXmkl >>> >>> ) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu90mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu92mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu100mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu101mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> >>> You can easily install these pip wheels in your system either by >>> downloading them to your machine first and then installing by >>> doing: >>> >>> pip install /path/to/downloaded/wheel.whl >>> >>> Or you can install directly by just giving the link to pip like >>> this: >>> >>> pip install >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> >>> Credit goes to everyone involved (in no particular order) Rakesh Vasudevan >>> Zach Kimberg Manu Seth Sheng Zha Jun Wu Pedro Larroy Chaitanya Bapat >>> >>> Thanks! >>> Sam >>> >>> >>> On Dec 5, 2019, at 1:16 AM, Lausen, Leonard <lau...@amazon.com.INVALID >>> <mailto:lau...@amazon.com.INVALID> <mailto:lau...@amazon.com.INVALID>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> We don't loose pip by hosting on S3. We just don't host nightly releases >>> on Pypi servers and mirror them to several hundred mirrors immediately >>> after each build is published which is very expensive for the Pypi project.. >>> People >>> can >>> still >>> install the nightly builds with pip by specifying the -f option. >>> >>> Uploading weekly releases to Pypi will reduce the cost for Pypi by ~75% >>> [1]. It may be acceptable to Pypi, but does it make sense for us? I'm not >>> convinced weekly release on Pypi is a good idea. Consider one release is >>> buggy, users will need to wait for 7 days for a fix. It doesn't provide >>> good user experience. >>> If someone has a stronger conviction about the value of weekly releases on >>> Pypi, that person shall please go ahead and propose it in a separate >>> discussion thread. >>> >>> Currently we don't have generally working nightly builds to Pypi and as a >>> matter of fact we know that we can't have them due to Pypi's policy and our >>> apparent need for large binaries. Given this fact and that no objection was >>> raised by >>> 2019-12-05 at 05:42 UTC, I conclude we have lazy consensus on stopping >>> upload attempts of nightly builds to Pypi. >>> >>> With consensus established, we can change the CI job to stop trying to >>> upload the nightly builds and then request Pypi to increase the limit. >>> Then >>> we >>> have one >>> less blocker for the 1.6 release. >>> >>> Best regards >>> Leonard >>> >>> [1]: Lower cost due to less releases, but higher cost due to 500MB -> >>> 800MB limit increase. Assuming that the limit increase translates into >>> actually larger binaries. >>> >>> >>> On Wed, 2019-12-04 at 22:20 +0100, Marco de Abreu wrote: >>> Are weekly releases an option? It was brought up as concern that we might >>> lose pip as a pretty common distribution channel where people consume >>> nightly builds. I don't feel like that concern has been properly addressed >>> so far. >>> >>> -Marco >>> >>> Lausen, Leonard <lau...@amazon.com.invalid<mailto: >>> lau...@amazon.com.invalid><mailto: >>> lau...@amazon.com.invalid<mailto:lau...@amazon.com.invalid>>> schrieb am >>> Mi., 4. Dez. 2019, >>> 04:09: >>> >>> As a simple POC to test distribution, you can try installing MXNet based >>> on these 3 URLs: >>> >>> pip install --no-cache-dir >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://mxnet-dev.s3.amazonaws.com/mxnet_cu101-1.5.1.post0-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> pip install --no-cache-dir >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://mxnet-dev.s3-accelerate.amazonaws.com/mxnet_cu101-1.5.1.post0-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> pip install --no-cache-dir >>> https://d19zq12jzu4w95.cloudfront.net/ >>> mxnet_cu101-1.5.1.post0-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> < >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://d19zq12jzu4w95.cloudfront.net/mxnet_cu101-1.5.1.post0-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> >>> < >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> https://d19zq12jzu4w95.cloudfront.net/mxnet_cu101-1.5.1.post0-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl >>> >>> >>> where --no-cache-dir prevents caching the downloaded file, for the purpose >>> of testing. (cu101 chosen based on large size) >>> >>> The first URL uses standard S3 bucket in US. The second uses >>> S3 >>> Accelerate >>> based >>> on CloudFront CDN. And the third uses CloudFront CDN. I'm adding the third >>> URL, as S3 Accelerate may or may not use all new CloudFront endpoints yet. >>> >>> Regarding voting: Uploading to Pypi is currently impossible, which is a >>> reality (so there is no option to continue as we do currently). Pypi folks >>> indicated they will unblock our uploads to Pypi once we stop uploading >>> nightly releases and taking up 20% of their ressources [1]. >>> >>> If there are any shortcomings or problems identified with uploading to S3, >>> we can work to address them. But for now, status quo is broken and this >>> seems the only solution addressing Pypi's problem. >>> >>> I don't mind if you state that you object to lazy consensus and start a >>> vote. If your "maybe [...] start a proper vote" was supposed to be an >>> objection to lazy consensus, please state so clearly (I'm not sure if >>> "maybe" >>> qualifies >>> as >>> objection). Though I think it only makes sense with at least 2 options to >>> vote on. Status quo is not a meaningful option, as it is already broken. >>> >>> Best regards >>> Leonard >>> >>> [1]: >>> >>> https://github.com/pypa/pypi-support/issues/50#issuecomment-560479706 >>> >>> On Tue, 2019-12-03 at 19:28 +0100, Marco de Abreu wrote: >>> Excellent! Could we maybe come up with a POC and a quick writeup and then >>> start a proper vote after everyone verified that it covers their use-cases? >>> -Marco >>> >>> Sheng Zha <zhash...@apache.org<mailto:zhash...@apache.org>> schrieb am >>> Di., 3. Dez. 2019, >>> 19:24: >>> >>> Yes, there is. We can also make it easier to access by using a >>> geo-location based DNS server so that China users are directed to that >>> local mirror. The rest of the world is already covered by the global >>> cloudfront. >>> >>> -sz >>> >>> On 2019/12/03 18:22:22, Marco de Abreu < marco.g.ab...@gmail.com<mailto: >>> marco.g.ab...@gmail.com> >>> >>> wrote: >>> Isn't there an s3 endpoint in Beijing? >>> >>> It seems like this topic still warrants some discussion and thus I'd >>> >>> prefer >>> if we don't move forward with lazy consensus. >>> >>> -Marco >>> >>> Tao Lv <mutou...@gmail.com<mailto:mutou...@gmail.com>> schrieb am Di., 3. >>> Dez. 2019, >>> 14:31: >>> >>> * For pypi, we can use mirrors. >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 9:28 PM Tao Lv <mutou...@gmail.com<mailto: >>> 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<mailto: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 >>> >>>
