Re: [DISCUSS] Apache MXNet: Path to graduation

[Hen]

Amazon. Amazon created the brand. They own the first repository to use the
term in this conext ( https://github.com/gluon-api ). There was some
involvement from Microsoft, so Microsoft's opinion may also be relevant.
Gluon is not an Apache Software Foundation nor Apache MXNet brand.

Unless it was very recent, I don't believe there have been any trademark
registrations. If Amazon would prefer Apache control the Gluon naming, I
think the simplest 'act' to make that so would be to move the gluon-api
repository over to ASF control.

Hen

On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 8:27 AM Chris Olivier  wrote:

> Who is the gluon “Brand Owner”?
>
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 10:43 AM Chris Olivier 
> wrote:
>
> > Who is the gluon "brand owner"?
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 10:13 AM Qing Lan  wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Lieven,
> >>
> >> Thanks for your comments. After the discussion with several committers
> >> and contributors offline, we agreed that there are space for
> improvement.
> >>
> >>
> >>   1.  About the Gluon naming
> >>
> >> As we know, Gluon is born with the unique API design pattern. It
> >> gradually became the dominant Python front end for MXNet. I would
> suggest
> >> to discuss more with the Brand owner and see if there could be a further
> >> integration with MXNet. To MXNet itself, it becomes more popular with
> this
> >> frontend. We lean on the strong community and improve our product
> better by
> >> consuming the feedback from it.
> >>
> >>  2. Diversity of the PMC
> >> Currently, we have 40 PMC numbers from different companies, like Amazon,
> >> Uber, NVIDIA, ByteDance and a lot more. We are trying to grow the number
> >> and invite indivials from different companies as well as research
> institute.
> >>
> >> 3. Release rotation
> >> In the history, most of the releases were done by the Amazon side.
> >> Currently, we are moving on to rotate this responsibility with
> >> contributors/committers not from Amazon to start working on them.
> >>
> >> 4. Committers from different firm/institution should have real work
> >> on MXNet
> >> I can tell from the issues/PRs/rfcs they submitted and indeed and indeed
> >> we should encourage the committers who is less active to be involved
> into
> >> MXNet contribution.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Qing
> >>
> >> 
> >> From: Lieven Govaerts 
> >> Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2019 5:59
> >> To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org 
> >> Cc: d...@mxnet.apache.org 
> >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache MXNet: Path to graduation
> >>
> >> Hi Qing,
> >>
> >> as a user and ASF member observing this project:
> >>
> >> On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 01:44, Qing Lan  wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi All,
> >> >
> >> > I would like to start a thread to discuss about the graduation for
> >> Apache
> >> > MXNet. From my time working in the community, I saw a great
> improvement
> >> in
> >> > most of the area that we do to make MXNet a better place. We keep
> >> tracking
> >> > on all of the issues user raised and reviewing PRs. We follow the
> Apache
> >> > Way to release the package in official repository.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> in terms of code, documentation, visibility this project is certainly
> in a
> >> healthy state, I see a lot of interest of companies and people, the
> >> community is growing... As a user that gives me confidence my time
> >> invested
> >> in this product is well spent.
> >>
> >>
> >> > In 2017, Apache MXNet joined the Apache incubation project. I think
> now
> >> is
> >> > a good time to review the path to graduate MXNet and move forward to
> it.
> >> > Please feel free to share your thoughts on graduation and space for
> >> > improvement.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> If I may share one observation: I don't see the community working a lot
> on
> >> non-code topics. One example that I personally find important is the
> >> discussion of the Gluon brand. People have expressed confusion about how
> >> the name is used by multiple non-ASF projects, the MXNet team finds the
> >> Gluon name very valuable yet the discussion on how to protect the name
> and
> >> decide on acceptable use by other projects has stalled [1]. I suggest
> you
> >> make a decision on this topic before you go for graduation.
> >>
> >> regards,
> >>
> >> Lieven
> >>
> >> [1]
> >>
> >>
> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mxnet-dev/201903.mbox/%3ccac_cu1gi+3s6ob48kt0x5wta4oxdum8uq9tmnyku2ujyaya...@mail.gmail.com%3e
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > You can find more about graduation policy in here:
> >> > https://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Qing
> >> >
> >>
> >
>

Re: new website

[Yuan Tang]

I think for now PDF would still be used by a good amount of users since R
users are used to read PDF manual for packages that don't have websites.

Nowadays Github pages + pkgdown combination is getting more and more
popular so we would see a trend soon towards web hosted docs for R
packages.

On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 8:58 PM Aaron Markham 
wrote:

> pkgdown makes some nice looking R microsites. Good idea. Do you know
> if many R users would still want the pdf or have things moved to use
> websites for reference like this?
> One of the nice things about the new pipelines for docs is that
> they're not wrapped by Sphinx, so our R contributors will have an
> easier time testing and adding this kind of feature.
>
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 5:34 PM Yuan Tang  wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the update, Aaron.
> >
> > Regarding the R docs, one suggestion I have is to use pkgdown package (
> > https://pkgdown.r-lib.org/index.html) to automatically generated the
> > documentation pages (tutorials, API reference, etc.). I've seen huge
> > adoption of this package being used for documentations in the R
> community.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 8:26 PM Aaron Markham  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > I'm very excited to share a preview and the pull requests for a new
> > > website and new documentation pipelines.
> > >
> > > The following link is using Apache's new staging site setup. It is
> > > built from the new docs publishing pipelines in CI where a Jekyll
> > > website is built, and documentation artifacts from Clojure, CPP, Java,
> > > Julia, Python, R, and Scala are combined into one website.
> > >
> > > https://mxnet-beta.staged.apache.org
> > >
> > > It is the culmination of a lot of effort of several MXNet contributors.
> > >
> > > * A huge shout out goes to Thomas Delteil for the work on the new
> > > Jekyll-backend and beautiful-looking website, and for helping me out
> > > whenever I'd get stuck on revamping the 7 different API docs systems
> > > in CI.
> > > * Soji Adeshina and Vishaal Kapoor both helping me with the system
> > > design for the new docs pipelines.
> > > * Per Goncalves da Silva and Marco de Abreu both helped me with
> > > figuring out CI issues.
> > > * We also ported over Mu Li's beta site for the Python & R APIs which
> > > had many contributors there. Thanks goes to Mu, Ivy Bazan, Jonas
> > > Mueller, Aston Zhang, and Zhi Zhang for their help & contributions. I
> > > apologize in advance if I missed anyone.
> > >
> > > Highlights:
> > >
> > > * R docs are now generated as part of CI. There were issues with R
> > > docs coming from beta repo. They were not reproducible. So I began the
> > > process of creating the pdf doc that is expected by R users as an
> > > alternative. Thomas fixed a CPP bug that was blocking 90% of the docs
> > > from appearing. The R docs are 10x in length compared to the pdf we're
> > > hosting now!
> > >
> > > * Each other API is built in a micro-site fashion. You will notice
> > > that the reference API links will open up the site that is generated
> > > by that language's docs tools. We tried to keep the navigation common
> > > and do this for the Python API. This is something that can be expanded
> > > on for the other APIs in later updates to the website.
> > >
> > > * Each doc set can be generated separately with functions that will
> > > run in Docker and generate the docs artifacts. This means you can now
> > > focus on your preferred API and not have to deal with anything else.
> > >
> > > * Website changes are now much easier. You can serve Jekyll locally,
> > > and have it do incremental updates, so you can see your changes live
> > > without having to build MXNet or anything else. It's a pure front-end
> > > setup.
> > >
> > > * For website publishing, the MXNet binary is built once and then
> > > shared with the other docs generation pipelines.
> > >
> > > * For individual docs runs, you can run a "lite" binary build, then
> > > follow it up with the docs run you want.
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > > For example to build MXNet:
> > >
> > > ci/build.py --docker-registry mxnetcidev --platform ubuntu_cpu_lite
> > > /work/runtime_functions.sh build_ubuntu_cpu_docs
> > >
> > > Then to build the R docs:
> > >
> > > ci/build.py --docker-registry mxnetcidev --platform ubuntu_cpu_r
> > > /work/runtime_functions.sh build_r_docs
> > >
> > > There is now a Docker image and a runtime_function for each API
> > > (except Perl which is built offsite). Python is like this:
> > >
> > > ci/build.py --docker-registry mxnetcidev --platform ubuntu_cpu_python
> > > /work/runtime_functions.sh build_python_docs
> > >
> > > The pattern for platform is ubuntu_cpu_{api} and runtime_functions.sh
> > > is build_{api}_docs.
> > >
> > > Further information is on the developer wiki:
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Building+the+New+Website
> > > 
> > >
> > > Ok, now this is where YOU come in. We need reviewers and testers.
> > >
> > > There

Re: new website

[Aaron Markham]

pkgdown makes some nice looking R microsites. Good idea. Do you know
if many R users would still want the pdf or have things moved to use
websites for reference like this?
One of the nice things about the new pipelines for docs is that
they're not wrapped by Sphinx, so our R contributors will have an
easier time testing and adding this kind of feature.

On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 5:34 PM Yuan Tang  wrote:
>
> Thanks for the update, Aaron.
>
> Regarding the R docs, one suggestion I have is to use pkgdown package (
> https://pkgdown.r-lib.org/index.html) to automatically generated the
> documentation pages (tutorials, API reference, etc.). I've seen huge
> adoption of this package being used for documentations in the R community.
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 8:26 PM Aaron Markham 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I'm very excited to share a preview and the pull requests for a new
> > website and new documentation pipelines.
> >
> > The following link is using Apache's new staging site setup. It is
> > built from the new docs publishing pipelines in CI where a Jekyll
> > website is built, and documentation artifacts from Clojure, CPP, Java,
> > Julia, Python, R, and Scala are combined into one website.
> >
> > https://mxnet-beta.staged.apache.org
> >
> > It is the culmination of a lot of effort of several MXNet contributors.
> >
> > * A huge shout out goes to Thomas Delteil for the work on the new
> > Jekyll-backend and beautiful-looking website, and for helping me out
> > whenever I'd get stuck on revamping the 7 different API docs systems
> > in CI.
> > * Soji Adeshina and Vishaal Kapoor both helping me with the system
> > design for the new docs pipelines.
> > * Per Goncalves da Silva and Marco de Abreu both helped me with
> > figuring out CI issues.
> > * We also ported over Mu Li's beta site for the Python & R APIs which
> > had many contributors there. Thanks goes to Mu, Ivy Bazan, Jonas
> > Mueller, Aston Zhang, and Zhi Zhang for their help & contributions. I
> > apologize in advance if I missed anyone.
> >
> > Highlights:
> >
> > * R docs are now generated as part of CI. There were issues with R
> > docs coming from beta repo. They were not reproducible. So I began the
> > process of creating the pdf doc that is expected by R users as an
> > alternative. Thomas fixed a CPP bug that was blocking 90% of the docs
> > from appearing. The R docs are 10x in length compared to the pdf we're
> > hosting now!
> >
> > * Each other API is built in a micro-site fashion. You will notice
> > that the reference API links will open up the site that is generated
> > by that language's docs tools. We tried to keep the navigation common
> > and do this for the Python API. This is something that can be expanded
> > on for the other APIs in later updates to the website.
> >
> > * Each doc set can be generated separately with functions that will
> > run in Docker and generate the docs artifacts. This means you can now
> > focus on your preferred API and not have to deal with anything else.
> >
> > * Website changes are now much easier. You can serve Jekyll locally,
> > and have it do incremental updates, so you can see your changes live
> > without having to build MXNet or anything else. It's a pure front-end
> > setup.
> >
> > * For website publishing, the MXNet binary is built once and then
> > shared with the other docs generation pipelines.
> >
> > * For individual docs runs, you can run a "lite" binary build, then
> > follow it up with the docs run you want.
> >
> > ---
> >
> > For example to build MXNet:
> >
> > ci/build.py --docker-registry mxnetcidev --platform ubuntu_cpu_lite
> > /work/runtime_functions.sh build_ubuntu_cpu_docs
> >
> > Then to build the R docs:
> >
> > ci/build.py --docker-registry mxnetcidev --platform ubuntu_cpu_r
> > /work/runtime_functions.sh build_r_docs
> >
> > There is now a Docker image and a runtime_function for each API
> > (except Perl which is built offsite). Python is like this:
> >
> > ci/build.py --docker-registry mxnetcidev --platform ubuntu_cpu_python
> > /work/runtime_functions.sh build_python_docs
> >
> > The pattern for platform is ubuntu_cpu_{api} and runtime_functions.sh
> > is build_{api}_docs.
> >
> > Further information is on the developer wiki:
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Building+the+New+Website
> > 
> >
> > Ok, now this is where YOU come in. We need reviewers and testers.
> >
> > There are a lot of changes. My original PR was over 1,000 files with
> > 83k additions and 55k deletions. So, Thomas broke this up into three
> > pull requests that stack.
> >
> > Step 1 New Content https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15884
> > Step 2 Remove Old Content
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15885
> > Step 3 Setup New Jenkins
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15886
> >
> > For reviewing purposes, start with the new content - what's easily
> > visible on the preview website. This is mostly happening in the fi

Re: new website

[Yuan Tang]

Thanks for the update, Aaron.

Regarding the R docs, one suggestion I have is to use pkgdown package (
https://pkgdown.r-lib.org/index.html) to automatically generated the
documentation pages (tutorials, API reference, etc.). I've seen huge
adoption of this package being used for documentations in the R community.


On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 8:26 PM Aaron Markham 
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm very excited to share a preview and the pull requests for a new
> website and new documentation pipelines.
>
> The following link is using Apache's new staging site setup. It is
> built from the new docs publishing pipelines in CI where a Jekyll
> website is built, and documentation artifacts from Clojure, CPP, Java,
> Julia, Python, R, and Scala are combined into one website.
>
> https://mxnet-beta.staged.apache.org
>
> It is the culmination of a lot of effort of several MXNet contributors.
>
> * A huge shout out goes to Thomas Delteil for the work on the new
> Jekyll-backend and beautiful-looking website, and for helping me out
> whenever I'd get stuck on revamping the 7 different API docs systems
> in CI.
> * Soji Adeshina and Vishaal Kapoor both helping me with the system
> design for the new docs pipelines.
> * Per Goncalves da Silva and Marco de Abreu both helped me with
> figuring out CI issues.
> * We also ported over Mu Li's beta site for the Python & R APIs which
> had many contributors there. Thanks goes to Mu, Ivy Bazan, Jonas
> Mueller, Aston Zhang, and Zhi Zhang for their help & contributions. I
> apologize in advance if I missed anyone.
>
> Highlights:
>
> * R docs are now generated as part of CI. There were issues with R
> docs coming from beta repo. They were not reproducible. So I began the
> process of creating the pdf doc that is expected by R users as an
> alternative. Thomas fixed a CPP bug that was blocking 90% of the docs
> from appearing. The R docs are 10x in length compared to the pdf we're
> hosting now!
>
> * Each other API is built in a micro-site fashion. You will notice
> that the reference API links will open up the site that is generated
> by that language's docs tools. We tried to keep the navigation common
> and do this for the Python API. This is something that can be expanded
> on for the other APIs in later updates to the website.
>
> * Each doc set can be generated separately with functions that will
> run in Docker and generate the docs artifacts. This means you can now
> focus on your preferred API and not have to deal with anything else.
>
> * Website changes are now much easier. You can serve Jekyll locally,
> and have it do incremental updates, so you can see your changes live
> without having to build MXNet or anything else. It's a pure front-end
> setup.
>
> * For website publishing, the MXNet binary is built once and then
> shared with the other docs generation pipelines.
>
> * For individual docs runs, you can run a "lite" binary build, then
> follow it up with the docs run you want.
>
> ---
>
> For example to build MXNet:
>
> ci/build.py --docker-registry mxnetcidev --platform ubuntu_cpu_lite
> /work/runtime_functions.sh build_ubuntu_cpu_docs
>
> Then to build the R docs:
>
> ci/build.py --docker-registry mxnetcidev --platform ubuntu_cpu_r
> /work/runtime_functions.sh build_r_docs
>
> There is now a Docker image and a runtime_function for each API
> (except Perl which is built offsite). Python is like this:
>
> ci/build.py --docker-registry mxnetcidev --platform ubuntu_cpu_python
> /work/runtime_functions.sh build_python_docs
>
> The pattern for platform is ubuntu_cpu_{api} and runtime_functions.sh
> is build_{api}_docs.
>
> Further information is on the developer wiki:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Building+the+New+Website
> 
>
> Ok, now this is where YOU come in. We need reviewers and testers.
>
> There are a lot of changes. My original PR was over 1,000 files with
> 83k additions and 55k deletions. So, Thomas broke this up into three
> pull requests that stack.
>
> Step 1 New Content https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15884
> Step 2 Remove Old Content
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15885
> Step 3 Setup New Jenkins
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15886
>
> For reviewing purposes, start with the new content - what's easily
> visible on the preview website. This is mostly happening in the first
> PR:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15884
> You can also look at these helper PRs that show you the differences so
> it is easier to review what's happening in Steps 2 and 3. You can
> review these now as well.
> Step 1->2: https://github.com/ThomasDelteil/incubator-mxnet/pull/5
> Step 2->3: https://github.com/ThomasDelteil/incubator-mxnet/pull/6
>
> I really appreciate everyone's support on this effort.
>
> Cheers,
> Aaron
>

new website

[Aaron Markham]

Hi everyone,

I'm very excited to share a preview and the pull requests for a new
website and new documentation pipelines.

The following link is using Apache's new staging site setup. It is
built from the new docs publishing pipelines in CI where a Jekyll
website is built, and documentation artifacts from Clojure, CPP, Java,
Julia, Python, R, and Scala are combined into one website.

https://mxnet-beta.staged.apache.org

It is the culmination of a lot of effort of several MXNet contributors.

* A huge shout out goes to Thomas Delteil for the work on the new
Jekyll-backend and beautiful-looking website, and for helping me out
whenever I'd get stuck on revamping the 7 different API docs systems
in CI.
* Soji Adeshina and Vishaal Kapoor both helping me with the system
design for the new docs pipelines.
* Per Goncalves da Silva and Marco de Abreu both helped me with
figuring out CI issues.
* We also ported over Mu Li's beta site for the Python & R APIs which
had many contributors there. Thanks goes to Mu, Ivy Bazan, Jonas
Mueller, Aston Zhang, and Zhi Zhang for their help & contributions. I
apologize in advance if I missed anyone.

Highlights:

* R docs are now generated as part of CI. There were issues with R
docs coming from beta repo. They were not reproducible. So I began the
process of creating the pdf doc that is expected by R users as an
alternative. Thomas fixed a CPP bug that was blocking 90% of the docs
from appearing. The R docs are 10x in length compared to the pdf we're
hosting now!

* Each other API is built in a micro-site fashion. You will notice
that the reference API links will open up the site that is generated
by that language's docs tools. We tried to keep the navigation common
and do this for the Python API. This is something that can be expanded
on for the other APIs in later updates to the website.

* Each doc set can be generated separately with functions that will
run in Docker and generate the docs artifacts. This means you can now
focus on your preferred API and not have to deal with anything else.

* Website changes are now much easier. You can serve Jekyll locally,
and have it do incremental updates, so you can see your changes live
without having to build MXNet or anything else. It's a pure front-end
setup.

* For website publishing, the MXNet binary is built once and then
shared with the other docs generation pipelines.

* For individual docs runs, you can run a "lite" binary build, then
follow it up with the docs run you want.

---

For example to build MXNet:

ci/build.py --docker-registry mxnetcidev --platform ubuntu_cpu_lite
/work/runtime_functions.sh build_ubuntu_cpu_docs

Then to build the R docs:

ci/build.py --docker-registry mxnetcidev --platform ubuntu_cpu_r
/work/runtime_functions.sh build_r_docs

There is now a Docker image and a runtime_function for each API
(except Perl which is built offsite). Python is like this:

ci/build.py --docker-registry mxnetcidev --platform ubuntu_cpu_python
/work/runtime_functions.sh build_python_docs

The pattern for platform is ubuntu_cpu_{api} and runtime_functions.sh
is build_{api}_docs.

Further information is on the developer wiki:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Building+the+New+Website


Ok, now this is where YOU come in. We need reviewers and testers.

There are a lot of changes. My original PR was over 1,000 files with
83k additions and 55k deletions. So, Thomas broke this up into three
pull requests that stack.

Step 1 New Content https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15884
Step 2 Remove Old Content https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15885
Step 3 Setup New Jenkins https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15886

For reviewing purposes, start with the new content - what's easily
visible on the preview website. This is mostly happening in the first
PR:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15884
You can also look at these helper PRs that show you the differences so
it is easier to review what's happening in Steps 2 and 3. You can
review these now as well.
Step 1->2: https://github.com/ThomasDelteil/incubator-mxnet/pull/5
Step 2->3: https://github.com/ThomasDelteil/incubator-mxnet/pull/6

I really appreciate everyone's support on this effort.

Cheers,
Aaron

Re: [Discussion] MXNet 1.5.1 release

[Lai Wei]

Hi Tao,

Just checked 1.5.x nightly build is passing, so 10 is not needed. I moved
it so 1.6.0 scope.

Thanks


Best Regards

Lai


On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 8:12 AM Tao Lv  wrote:

> @Aaron,
> Thank you for looking into these two issues. I have removed the #15609 from
> the scope of 1.5.1. Please let me know if you have any update about #15608.
>
> @Lai,
> I'm fine with the decision. License issue about MKL-DNN, cub and pybind is
> moved to next release.
>
> @Sam,
> I also removed the sidebar issue [3] from the scope of 1.5.1. Besides, I
> notice one of your cherry picks is stopped by the CI. Please take a look at
> it. Thanks.
>
> *Nice progress since the last update:*
> 1. Per the discussion, we decided to remove #15609, the license issue about
> MKL-DNN, cub and pybind, and the sidebar issue [3] from the scope of 1.5.1
> patch release;
> 2. 3 fixes [4] [5] [6] were merged into the v1.5.x branch.
>
> *Opens (suggested owners are highlighted):*
> 1. @Aaron is working on #15608 to see if we can have it in v1.5.x;
> 2. Two cherry pick PRs [7] [8] cannot pass the CI. I have pinged the
> authors to take a look at the CI failures.
> 3. @Kellen proposed 5 fixes [9] for TensorRT but till now only 3 are picked
> to v1.5.x. Please help to confirm if the other 2 are still needed.
> 4. Sorry that I missed the proposal for fixing the nightly build [10] in
> previous update. @Lai, can you help to confirm if it's still valid?
> 5. @Lin please help to make a conclusion for the GPU OOM issue caused by
> topk regression [11]. If it cannot be addressed on v1.5.x branch, I will
> remove it from the scope of this release and mark it as a known issue in
> the release note.
>
> Please find the details in
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/1.5.1+Release+Plan+and+Status
> .
>
> Thanks,
> -tao
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15609
> [2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15608
> [3] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15200
> [4] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16029
> [5] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16026
> [6] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16028
> [7] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15803
> [8] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16027
> [9]
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15613#issuecomment-520688668
> [10]
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15613#issuecomment-516937546
> [11] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15703
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 1:06 AM Skalicky, Sam 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Tao,
> >
> > I just talked with Aaron, lets leave the sidebar issue for later.
> >
> > I created PRs in the v1.5.x branch to cherry pick the fixes into the
> 1.5.1
> > release:
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16027
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16028
> >
> > Thanks for your work on this release!
> > Sam
> >
> > On Aug 28, 2019, at 9:35 AM, Lai Wei  > roywei...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Regrading the license issue[1],  we still have item 3, 4, 5 left.
> > I think it's better to remove them from 1.5.1 release scope and target
> for
> > 1.6.0 as it need more time and requires changes that should not go into
> > patch release.
> >
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15542
> >
> > Best Regards
> >
> > Lai
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 9:20 AM Aaron Markham  > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > 5 no. Install page defaults to master so you don't need to pick it.
> > 6 probably, but there might be other PRs needed. I'd check out the branch
> > and attempt the install across platforms to be sure.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, 08:55 Tao Lv  > ta...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Aaron,
> >
> > They were proposed to be ported to v1.5.x at the beginning of the
> > discussion but I didn't see any action for that. So I'm wondering if
> > they're still needed. I asked for that in the last update on 8/20 but
> > didn't get a response.
> >
> > If they're still needed, I hope someone who is more familiar with Julia
> > frontend can help to cherry pick the commits to the v1.5.x branch.
> >
> > thanks,
> > -tao
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 11:43 PM Aaron Markham <
> > aaron.s.mark...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > I don't see any request for action on the Julia PRs: 5 or 6.
> > We didn't put the change in right away because we wanted it to not
> > break
> > anything. But the changes are needed to make Julia setup more seamless.
> >
> > What "update" is needed?
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, 08:36 Tao Lv  > ta...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > @Pedro, seems the issue is still open on the master branch. Do you
> > still
> > think we can have your fix on the 1.5.x branch?
> >
> > Progress since last update:
> > 1. We received several more proposals in the github thread [1]. I
> > humbly
> > ask the reporters to pick the fixes to the v1

Re: [Discussion] MXNet 1.5.1 release

[Lin Yuan]

Hi Tao,

What is the current timeline for 1.5.1 release? Since it is a patch release
to include only critical bug fix, would it make sense to have a short
release time? I propose to have code freeze as early as next week. Please
let me know if there is any other comments.

Best,

Lin

On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 3:23 PM Lin Yuan  wrote:

> Hi Tao,
>
> 5) is not a bug. It's just a large tensor support requirement. The PR was
> to fix a memory alignment issue introduced in master but not in 1.5.1
> (since you did not cherry pick that PR). So, I have crossed out 5) in the
> doc and I don't think we need to mention it in release note.
>
> Lin
>
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 8:12 AM Tao Lv  wrote:
>
>> @Aaron,
>> Thank you for looking into these two issues. I have removed the #15609
>> from
>> the scope of 1.5.1. Please let me know if you have any update about
>> #15608.
>>
>> @Lai,
>> I'm fine with the decision. License issue about MKL-DNN, cub and pybind is
>> moved to next release.
>>
>> @Sam,
>> I also removed the sidebar issue [3] from the scope of 1.5.1. Besides, I
>> notice one of your cherry picks is stopped by the CI. Please take a look
>> at
>> it. Thanks.
>>
>> *Nice progress since the last update:*
>> 1. Per the discussion, we decided to remove #15609, the license issue
>> about
>> MKL-DNN, cub and pybind, and the sidebar issue [3] from the scope of 1.5.1
>> patch release;
>> 2. 3 fixes [4] [5] [6] were merged into the v1.5.x branch.
>>
>> *Opens (suggested owners are highlighted):*
>> 1. @Aaron is working on #15608 to see if we can have it in v1.5.x;
>> 2. Two cherry pick PRs [7] [8] cannot pass the CI. I have pinged the
>> authors to take a look at the CI failures.
>> 3. @Kellen proposed 5 fixes [9] for TensorRT but till now only 3 are
>> picked
>> to v1.5.x. Please help to confirm if the other 2 are still needed.
>> 4. Sorry that I missed the proposal for fixing the nightly build [10] in
>> previous update. @Lai, can you help to confirm if it's still valid?
>> 5. @Lin please help to make a conclusion for the GPU OOM issue caused by
>> topk regression [11]. If it cannot be addressed on v1.5.x branch, I will
>> remove it from the scope of this release and mark it as a known issue in
>> the release note.
>>
>> Please find the details in
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/1.5.1+Release+Plan+and+Status
>> .
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -tao
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15609
>> [2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15608
>> [3] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15200
>> [4] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16029
>> [5] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16026
>> [6] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16028
>> [7] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15803
>> [8] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16027
>> [9]
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15613#issuecomment-520688668
>> [10]
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15613#issuecomment-516937546
>> [11] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15703
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 1:06 AM Skalicky, Sam > >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Tao,
>> >
>> > I just talked with Aaron, lets leave the sidebar issue for later.
>> >
>> > I created PRs in the v1.5.x branch to cherry pick the fixes into the
>> 1.5.1
>> > release:
>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16027
>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16028
>> >
>> > Thanks for your work on this release!
>> > Sam
>> >
>> > On Aug 28, 2019, at 9:35 AM, Lai Wei > > roywei...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Regrading the license issue[1],  we still have item 3, 4, 5 left.
>> > I think it's better to remove them from 1.5.1 release scope and target
>> for
>> > 1.6.0 as it need more time and requires changes that should not go into
>> > patch release.
>> >
>> >
>> > [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15542
>> >
>> > Best Regards
>> >
>> > Lai
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 9:20 AM Aaron Markham <
>> aaron.s.mark...@gmail.com
>> > >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > 5 no. Install page defaults to master so you don't need to pick it.
>> > 6 probably, but there might be other PRs needed. I'd check out the
>> branch
>> > and attempt the install across platforms to be sure.
>> >
>> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, 08:55 Tao Lv > > ta...@apache.org>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Aaron,
>> >
>> > They were proposed to be ported to v1.5.x at the beginning of the
>> > discussion but I didn't see any action for that. So I'm wondering if
>> > they're still needed. I asked for that in the last update on 8/20 but
>> > didn't get a response.
>> >
>> > If they're still needed, I hope someone who is more familiar with Julia
>> > frontend can help to cherry pick the commits to the v1.5.x branch.
>> >
>> > thanks,
>> > -tao
>> >
>> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 11:43 PM Aaron Markham <
>> > aaron.s.mark...@gmail.

Re: [Discussion] MXNet 1.5.1 release

[Lin Yuan]

Hi Tao,

5) is not a bug. It's just a large tensor support requirement. The PR was
to fix a memory alignment issue introduced in master but not in 1.5.1
(since you did not cherry pick that PR). So, I have crossed out 5) in the
doc and I don't think we need to mention it in release note.

Lin

On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 8:12 AM Tao Lv  wrote:

> @Aaron,
> Thank you for looking into these two issues. I have removed the #15609 from
> the scope of 1.5.1. Please let me know if you have any update about #15608.
>
> @Lai,
> I'm fine with the decision. License issue about MKL-DNN, cub and pybind is
> moved to next release.
>
> @Sam,
> I also removed the sidebar issue [3] from the scope of 1.5.1. Besides, I
> notice one of your cherry picks is stopped by the CI. Please take a look at
> it. Thanks.
>
> *Nice progress since the last update:*
> 1. Per the discussion, we decided to remove #15609, the license issue about
> MKL-DNN, cub and pybind, and the sidebar issue [3] from the scope of 1.5.1
> patch release;
> 2. 3 fixes [4] [5] [6] were merged into the v1.5.x branch.
>
> *Opens (suggested owners are highlighted):*
> 1. @Aaron is working on #15608 to see if we can have it in v1.5.x;
> 2. Two cherry pick PRs [7] [8] cannot pass the CI. I have pinged the
> authors to take a look at the CI failures.
> 3. @Kellen proposed 5 fixes [9] for TensorRT but till now only 3 are picked
> to v1.5.x. Please help to confirm if the other 2 are still needed.
> 4. Sorry that I missed the proposal for fixing the nightly build [10] in
> previous update. @Lai, can you help to confirm if it's still valid?
> 5. @Lin please help to make a conclusion for the GPU OOM issue caused by
> topk regression [11]. If it cannot be addressed on v1.5.x branch, I will
> remove it from the scope of this release and mark it as a known issue in
> the release note.
>
> Please find the details in
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/1.5.1+Release+Plan+and+Status
> .
>
> Thanks,
> -tao
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15609
> [2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15608
> [3] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15200
> [4] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16029
> [5] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16026
> [6] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16028
> [7] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15803
> [8] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16027
> [9]
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15613#issuecomment-520688668
> [10]
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15613#issuecomment-516937546
> [11] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15703
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 1:06 AM Skalicky, Sam 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Tao,
> >
> > I just talked with Aaron, lets leave the sidebar issue for later.
> >
> > I created PRs in the v1.5.x branch to cherry pick the fixes into the
> 1.5.1
> > release:
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16027
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16028
> >
> > Thanks for your work on this release!
> > Sam
> >
> > On Aug 28, 2019, at 9:35 AM, Lai Wei  > roywei...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Regrading the license issue[1],  we still have item 3, 4, 5 left.
> > I think it's better to remove them from 1.5.1 release scope and target
> for
> > 1.6.0 as it need more time and requires changes that should not go into
> > patch release.
> >
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15542
> >
> > Best Regards
> >
> > Lai
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 9:20 AM Aaron Markham  > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > 5 no. Install page defaults to master so you don't need to pick it.
> > 6 probably, but there might be other PRs needed. I'd check out the branch
> > and attempt the install across platforms to be sure.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, 08:55 Tao Lv  > ta...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Aaron,
> >
> > They were proposed to be ported to v1.5.x at the beginning of the
> > discussion but I didn't see any action for that. So I'm wondering if
> > they're still needed. I asked for that in the last update on 8/20 but
> > didn't get a response.
> >
> > If they're still needed, I hope someone who is more familiar with Julia
> > frontend can help to cherry pick the commits to the v1.5.x branch.
> >
> > thanks,
> > -tao
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 11:43 PM Aaron Markham <
> > aaron.s.mark...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > I don't see any request for action on the Julia PRs: 5 or 6.
> > We didn't put the change in right away because we wanted it to not
> > break
> > anything. But the changes are needed to make Julia setup more seamless.
> >
> > What "update" is needed?
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, 08:36 Tao Lv  > ta...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > @Pedro, seems the issue is still open on the master branch. Do you
> > still
> > think we can have your fix on the 1.5.x branch?
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache MXNet: Path to graduation

[Chris Olivier]

Who is the gluon “Brand Owner”?

On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 10:43 AM Chris Olivier 
wrote:

> Who is the gluon "brand owner"?
>
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 10:13 AM Qing Lan  wrote:
>
>> Hi Lieven,
>>
>> Thanks for your comments. After the discussion with several committers
>> and contributors offline, we agreed that there are space for improvement.
>>
>>
>>   1.  About the Gluon naming
>>
>> As we know, Gluon is born with the unique API design pattern. It
>> gradually became the dominant Python front end for MXNet. I would suggest
>> to discuss more with the Brand owner and see if there could be a further
>> integration with MXNet. To MXNet itself, it becomes more popular with this
>> frontend. We lean on the strong community and improve our product better by
>> consuming the feedback from it.
>>
>>  2. Diversity of the PMC
>> Currently, we have 40 PMC numbers from different companies, like Amazon,
>> Uber, NVIDIA, ByteDance and a lot more. We are trying to grow the number
>> and invite indivials from different companies as well as research institute.
>>
>> 3. Release rotation
>> In the history, most of the releases were done by the Amazon side.
>> Currently, we are moving on to rotate this responsibility with
>> contributors/committers not from Amazon to start working on them.
>>
>> 4. Committers from different firm/institution should have real work
>> on MXNet
>> I can tell from the issues/PRs/rfcs they submitted and indeed and indeed
>> we should encourage the committers who is less active to be involved into
>> MXNet contribution.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Qing
>>
>> 
>> From: Lieven Govaerts 
>> Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2019 5:59
>> To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org 
>> Cc: d...@mxnet.apache.org 
>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache MXNet: Path to graduation
>>
>> Hi Qing,
>>
>> as a user and ASF member observing this project:
>>
>> On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 01:44, Qing Lan  wrote:
>>
>> > Hi All,
>> >
>> > I would like to start a thread to discuss about the graduation for
>> Apache
>> > MXNet. From my time working in the community, I saw a great improvement
>> in
>> > most of the area that we do to make MXNet a better place. We keep
>> tracking
>> > on all of the issues user raised and reviewing PRs. We follow the Apache
>> > Way to release the package in official repository.
>> >
>> >
>> in terms of code, documentation, visibility this project is certainly in a
>> healthy state, I see a lot of interest of companies and people, the
>> community is growing... As a user that gives me confidence my time
>> invested
>> in this product is well spent.
>>
>>
>> > In 2017, Apache MXNet joined the Apache incubation project. I think now
>> is
>> > a good time to review the path to graduate MXNet and move forward to it.
>> > Please feel free to share your thoughts on graduation and space for
>> > improvement.
>> >
>> >
>> If I may share one observation: I don't see the community working a lot on
>> non-code topics. One example that I personally find important is the
>> discussion of the Gluon brand. People have expressed confusion about how
>> the name is used by multiple non-ASF projects, the MXNet team finds the
>> Gluon name very valuable yet the discussion on how to protect the name and
>> decide on acceptable use by other projects has stalled [1]. I suggest you
>> make a decision on this topic before you go for graduation.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Lieven
>>
>> [1]
>>
>> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/mxnet-dev/201903.mbox/%3ccac_cu1gi+3s6ob48kt0x5wta4oxdum8uq9tmnyku2ujyaya...@mail.gmail.com%3e
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > You can find more about graduation policy in here:
>> > https://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Qing
>> >
>>
>

Re: [Discussion] MXNet 1.5.1 release

[Tao Lv]

@Aaron,
Thank you for looking into these two issues. I have removed the #15609 from
the scope of 1.5.1. Please let me know if you have any update about #15608.

@Lai,
I'm fine with the decision. License issue about MKL-DNN, cub and pybind is
moved to next release.

@Sam,
I also removed the sidebar issue [3] from the scope of 1.5.1. Besides, I
notice one of your cherry picks is stopped by the CI. Please take a look at
it. Thanks.

*Nice progress since the last update:*
1. Per the discussion, we decided to remove #15609, the license issue about
MKL-DNN, cub and pybind, and the sidebar issue [3] from the scope of 1.5.1
patch release;
2. 3 fixes [4] [5] [6] were merged into the v1.5.x branch.

*Opens (suggested owners are highlighted):*
1. @Aaron is working on #15608 to see if we can have it in v1.5.x;
2. Two cherry pick PRs [7] [8] cannot pass the CI. I have pinged the
authors to take a look at the CI failures.
3. @Kellen proposed 5 fixes [9] for TensorRT but till now only 3 are picked
to v1.5.x. Please help to confirm if the other 2 are still needed.
4. Sorry that I missed the proposal for fixing the nightly build [10] in
previous update. @Lai, can you help to confirm if it's still valid?
5. @Lin please help to make a conclusion for the GPU OOM issue caused by
topk regression [11]. If it cannot be addressed on v1.5.x branch, I will
remove it from the scope of this release and mark it as a known issue in
the release note.

Please find the details in
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/1.5.1+Release+Plan+and+Status
.

Thanks,
-tao

[1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15609
[2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15608
[3] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15200
[4] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16029
[5] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16026
[6] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16028
[7] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15803
[8] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16027
[9]
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15613#issuecomment-520688668
[10]
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15613#issuecomment-516937546
[11] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15703



On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 1:06 AM Skalicky, Sam 
wrote:

> Hi Tao,
>
> I just talked with Aaron, lets leave the sidebar issue for later.
>
> I created PRs in the v1.5.x branch to cherry pick the fixes into the 1.5.1
> release:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16027
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/16028
>
> Thanks for your work on this release!
> Sam
>
> On Aug 28, 2019, at 9:35 AM, Lai Wei  roywei...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Regrading the license issue[1],  we still have item 3, 4, 5 left.
> I think it's better to remove them from 1.5.1 release scope and target for
> 1.6.0 as it need more time and requires changes that should not go into
> patch release.
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/15542
>
> Best Regards
>
> Lai
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 9:20 AM Aaron Markham  >
> wrote:
>
> 5 no. Install page defaults to master so you don't need to pick it.
> 6 probably, but there might be other PRs needed. I'd check out the branch
> and attempt the install across platforms to be sure.
>
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, 08:55 Tao Lv  ta...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> Hi Aaron,
>
> They were proposed to be ported to v1.5.x at the beginning of the
> discussion but I didn't see any action for that. So I'm wondering if
> they're still needed. I asked for that in the last update on 8/20 but
> didn't get a response.
>
> If they're still needed, I hope someone who is more familiar with Julia
> frontend can help to cherry pick the commits to the v1.5.x branch.
>
> thanks,
> -tao
>
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 11:43 PM Aaron Markham <
> aaron.s.mark...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> I don't see any request for action on the Julia PRs: 5 or 6.
> We didn't put the change in right away because we wanted it to not
> break
> anything. But the changes are needed to make Julia setup more seamless.
>
> What "update" is needed?
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, 08:36 Tao Lv  ta...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> @Pedro, seems the issue is still open on the master branch. Do you
> still
> think we can have your fix on the 1.5.x branch?
>
> Progress since last update:
> 1. We received several more proposals in the github thread [1]. I
> humbly
> ask the reporters to pick the fixes to the v1.5.x. I will keep
> tracking
> the
> progress and the healthy status of the release branch.
> 2. Thanks to @Lai, the licence issue of julia cat image was fixed on
> the
> master branch and I opened a PR to pick it to v1.5.x [2].
> 3. The GPU OOM issue was fixed on the master branch by @Lin [3] . But
> there
> is a problem with porting the fix to v1.5.x branch [4].
>
> Opens:
> 1. https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15803 still can
> n