ciyongch commented on pull request #18648:
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/18648#issuecomment-652796279
@TaoLv helped to merge that PR, please help to check if the current code
base works expected or not :)
--
ciyongch commented on pull request #18648:
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/18648#issuecomment-652792263
Sure, that one should be fine, how about the rest of two PRs? May I know how
much effort and time you'll need to backport them? Thanks!
-
ciyongch commented on pull request #18648:
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/18648#issuecomment-652773680
Hi @sandeep-krishnamurthy , actually I was planning to drop rc0 before numpy
related issues were raised.
@sxjscience has already submitted partial PRs listed as abo
ciyongch commented on pull request #18648:
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/18648#issuecomment-652736178
Thanks a lot @sxjscience for the great help to filter the necessary PRs
targeting at 1.7 release and @sandeep-krishnamurthy for the valuable comments :)
When you're
ciyongch commented on pull request #18648:
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/18648#issuecomment-652355926
As numpy operator feature is in a quite active development in current master
branch and mainly targeting on 2.0 release. It'll be fine if the backport patch
is small
ciyongch commented on pull request #18648:
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/18648#issuecomment-652272413
Thanks @sxjscience for the effort.
It seems that this backport introduce **huge code changes** which will be a
big concern to the current stable code base especial
