Release plan - Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.0

[Meghna Baijal]

I am starting the process to prepare for Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.0
Release. I have drafted the release notes
to
cover the tasks planned this release.

A release candidate will be cut next week around Tuesday, November 21th and
voting will commence from then until Friday, November 24th. If you have any
additional features in progress and would like to include it in this
release, please make sure they have been merged by Thursday, November 16,
2017 and comment so I may update the release notes.


Feel free to add any other comments/suggestions.

Thanks,

Meghna Baijal

[BUILD FAILED] Branch master build 620

[Apache Jenkins Server]

Build for MXNet branch master has broken. Please view the build at 
https://builds.apache.org/job/incubator-mxnet/job/master/620/

Re: [DISCUSSION] Adding labels to PRs

[Stephen Bull]

As a complete noob here and someone without a JIRA account, it seems I can
at least view JIRA issues (so a plus for regular users when it comes to
release notes). And when it comes time to start contributing, I don't see
having to create a JIRA account to be a big deal, especially if the
associated overhead between JIRA and PRs is fairly minimal. It seems there
are many benefits given the replies so far.

Cheers,
Stephen

On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 at 11:28 Bhavin Thaker  wrote:

> +1 for better [1] PR Titles. As suggested by Madan and use by Spark, the
> current PR template seems to be ignored by folks and so we may want to
> simplify it to:
>
> Q1. What changes were proposed in this pull request?
>
> Q2. How was this patch tested?
>
>
> +1 to either [2] Jira OR [3] PR labels.
>
> Bhavin Thaker.
>
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Markus Weimer  wrote:
>
> > Option 2 works for us over in REEF. We are a bit (too) religious about it
> > [0], but it creates really nice commit messages[1].
> >
> > We require each commit message to start with a one line summary which
> names
> > the JIRA in brackets and describes the change, e.g. `[REEF-1234] Added
> > integration with mxnet`. The remainder of the commit message is valid
> > markdown, and they all end in a block which contains explicit references
> to
> > the JIRA and pull request:
> >
> > ```
> > JIRA:
> >   [REEF-1234](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/REEF-1234)
> >
> > Pull Request:
> >   This closes #1234
> > ```
> >
> > The hope is that this structure will eventually proof useful in automated
> > analysis. Then again, we haven't done that ever :)
> >
> > Markus
> >
> > [0]: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/REEF/Commit+Messages
> > [1]: https://github.com/apache/reef/commits/master
> >
>

[BUILD FAILED] Branch master build 619

[Apache Jenkins Server]

Build for MXNet branch master has broken. Please view the build at 
https://builds.apache.org/job/incubator-mxnet/job/master/619/

Re: [DISCUSSION] Adding labels to PRs

[Bhavin Thaker]

+1 for better [1] PR Titles. As suggested by Madan and use by Spark, the
current PR template seems to be ignored by folks and so we may want to
simplify it to:

Q1. What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Q2. How was this patch tested?


+1 to either [2] Jira OR [3] PR labels.

Bhavin Thaker.

On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Markus Weimer  wrote:

> Option 2 works for us over in REEF. We are a bit (too) religious about it
> [0], but it creates really nice commit messages[1].
>
> We require each commit message to start with a one line summary which names
> the JIRA in brackets and describes the change, e.g. `[REEF-1234] Added
> integration with mxnet`. The remainder of the commit message is valid
> markdown, and they all end in a block which contains explicit references to
> the JIRA and pull request:
>
> ```
> JIRA:
>   [REEF-1234](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/REEF-1234)
>
> Pull Request:
>   This closes #1234
> ```
>
> The hope is that this structure will eventually proof useful in automated
> analysis. Then again, we haven't done that ever :)
>
> Markus
>
> [0]: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/REEF/Commit+Messages
> [1]: https://github.com/apache/reef/commits/master
>

Re: [VOTE] A Separate CI System for Apache MXNet (incubating)

[Pedro Larroy]

+1 for [1]  (A setup separated from Apache Jenkins)

On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 4:50 AM, sandeep krishnamurthy
 wrote:
> +1 for [1] Jenkins (A setup separated from Apache Jenkins) - with
> preferably AWS Code Build integration to reduce the size of infrastructure
> we need to maintain.
>
> Thanks,
> Sandeep
>
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Bhavin Thaker 
> wrote:
>
>> +1 for [1] Jenkins (A setup separated from Apache Jenkins) - with various
>> plugins.
>>
>> Bhavin Thaker.
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 11:39 AM, Madan Jampani 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > +1 for (1)
>> >
>> > On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Meghna Baijal <
>> meghnabaijal2...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi All,
>> > > A need has been identified for MXNet’s CI/CD setup to move away from
>> the
>> > > Apache Jenkins Service. Over the past few days there has been active
>> > > discussion on the necessary and advanced features for such a system and
>> > the
>> > > various options available. These are being tracked in this Google Doc
>> > > > > dlavUDASzUmLjk/edit> (and
>> > > are also in the pdf attached).
>> > >
>> > > I would like to start a vote to choose the framework for this new CI/CD
>> > > system. The options are -
>> > > [1] Jenkins (A setup separated from Apache Jenkins) - with various
>> > plugins
>> > > [2] TeamCity
>> > > [3] Travis CI
>> > > [4] GitLabCI
>> > > [5] BuildBot
>> > > [6] Other - Please Name
>> > >
>> > > Please feel free to add a comment to support your choice.
>> > > This vote will be open from now until the end of the day on Monday
>> > > 11/13/2017
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Meghna Baijal
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Sandeep Krishnamurthy