If we replace the official CPU build, won't there still be new dependencies so it is not even guaranteed to work depending on whether the user has the dependencies (e.g. libgfortran) installed? I think there is also a performance degradation if we remove mkl.
But, we could still have a third-party build. I can try to redo the builds and release it on behalf of Amazon. Those builds can contain the full dependencies and supported environments (CPU, GPU, OSX) and are not restricted to Apache's license policies. Users will only have to update their dependency group IDs and they will get the same functionality as they have now. As Apache, we will only officially support JVM by building from source. Then, we just mention where to find the Amazon convenience builds while clarifying that they are not official Apache builds. On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 10:44 AM Carin Meier <carinme...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks. I understand now. If all the current jars are not compliant, then > they should be removed. > I also don't like the idea of "replacing" a jar on maven with another jar. > It sounds like we can consider publishing cpu jars only going forward for a > new release. > > - Carin > > On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 1:32 PM Lausen, Leonard <lau...@amazon.com.invalid > > > wrote: > > > On Fri, 2020-05-29 at 12:15 -0400, Carin Meier wrote: > > > > > > Going forward - we with future releases, we can have all users build > > their > > > own packages, just for the existing ones that are compliant on maven. > > > > > > On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 12:14 PM Carin Meier <carinme...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Leonard, > > > > > > > > Is this #2 Option still on the table? > > > > > > > > 2) Ask the Infra team to delete all MXNet GPU releases on > > > > > repository.apache.org and provide replacement releases without > > > > libgfortran.so > > > > > and other potentially Category-X files (I found libmkl_ml.so in one > > of > > > > the > > > > > JARs..) > > > > > > > > It seems like it would be a better solution than deleting ALL of > them, > > if > > > > the CPU ones are still valid and adhere to licensing. > > > > At least, we would break fewer users. > > > > > > > > - Carin > > > > Yes, this is a valid option. Just to clarify, the existing CPU releases > > don't > > adhere to the ASF policy. But MXNet project could create new, compliant > CPU > > releases and upload them to repository.apache.org. Finding a way to do > > this for > > the existing 1.x releases would also establish a path forward to continue > > creating such JARs for upcoming releases. > > >
