Hi,
> It is stated in the `./LICENSE`[1] file that 3rdparty/ctc_include is
> > `Apache-2.0 license`,
> > but the file in ctc_include is `NVIDIA CORPORATION` [2].
> > I'm not sure if this will be a problem?
That looks like an issue to me.
The 3rdparty/ctc_include directory includes the modengpu
Hi,
Regards the headers, perhaps think of it this way.
If you leave the headers on, you are respecting the original copyright holder
and their license for that code. The license is compatible with the ASF license
so there no issue, you just need to list it in you LICENSE file. If you remove
th
HI,
> It is stated in the `./LICENSE`[1] file that 3rdparty/ctc_include is
> `Apache-2.0 license`,
> but the file in ctc_include is `NVIDIA CORPORATION` [2].
> I'm not sure if this will be a problem?
That looks like an issue to me.
Kind Regards,
Justin
Hi,
> Thanks for helping us check. We will do a full review of the licenses of
> files (and hopefully find ways for automation for them too).
Automation may help but it is no replacement for human eyes.
> These files are adapted from numpy with significant modification from mxnet
> contributor
Hi Justin,
Thanks for helping us check. We will do a full review of the licenses of files
(and hopefully find ways for automation for them too). Since we did
specifically look at some of the files that were mentioned to have issues when
preparing rc7, I think that we must have been operating un
Oh yes, the problem is that `3rdparty/ctc_include` should be listed under
`BSD-3` section instead of `Apache-2.0` section in the `./LICENSE` file.
> On Sep 13, 2021, at 20:28, Xun Liu wrote:
>
> hi, zhenxu
>
> It is stated in the `./LICENSE`[1] file that 3rdparty/ctc_include is
> `Apache-2.0 l
hi, zhenxu
It is stated in the `./LICENSE`[1] file that 3rdparty/ctc_include is
`Apache-2.0 license`,
but the file in ctc_include is `NVIDIA CORPORATION` [2].
I'm not sure if this will be a problem?
[1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/blob/master/LICENSE#L221
[2]
https://github.com/apa
> I checked the mxnet project again,
> and I found that all the files in the third-party submodule
> ./3rdparty/ctc_include did not include ASF headers.
Hi Xun, those files are from third-party, and is listed in LICENSE
—
Zhenxu Ke (柯振旭)
GitHub @kezhenxu94
-
Hi, Panev
I checked the mxnet project again,
and I found that all the files in the third-party submodule
./3rdparty/ctc_include did not include ASF headers.
Best regards,
Xun Liu
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 3:21 PM Justin Mclean
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> -1 (binding) as issues brought up from the last RC h
Hi,
-1 (binding) as issues brought up from the last RC have not been fixed, namely:
- These files incorrectly have an ASF header [1][2][3]
- This is not mentioned in LICENSE [4][5]. A quick search shows about 20 files
with a Microsoft copyright (some are listed below).
I also checked:
- incubati
Carry my +1 from dev@
> On Aug 30, 2021, at 07:10, Serge Panev wrote:
>
> Dear community,
>
> This is a call for a releasing Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.9.0, release
> candidate 7.
>
> Apache MXNet (incubating) community has voted and approved the release.
>
> Vote thread:
> https://lists.apa
hi, Panev
+1 (binding) from me,
I checked the license issue in the rc6 version, and it has been fixed here.
https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/20475
I have checked the following items:
- Incubating in name
- LICENSE and NOTICE are fine
- DISCLAIMER exists
- All links are valid
- No
Dear community,
This is a call for a releasing Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.9.0, release
candidate 7.
Apache MXNet (incubating) community has voted and approved the release.
Vote thread:
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r7da1068178bb5f860cd0b20788c5510f31eaf0595f8f44cf42c09393%40%3Cdev.mxnet.
13 matches
Mail list logo
