mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Olivier <cjolivie...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Proposal] Stabilizing Apache MXNet CI build system
Date Fri, 27 Oct 2017 23:59:26 GMT
IMHO, it would be nice to have Apache JIRA for mxnet where these sort of
feature requests could be entered and publicly tracked and possibly taken
up by whoever has cycles with the JIRA helping to avoid overlapping work.
After the core system works, of course. WDYT?

On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 5:30 AM, Pedro Larroy <pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Just to provide a high level overview of the ideas and proposals
> coming from different sources for the requirements for testing and
> validation of builds:
>
> * Have terraform files for the testing infrastructure. Infrastructure
> as code (IaC). Minus not emulated / nor cloud based, embedded
> hardware. ("single command" replication of the testing infrastructure,
> no manual steps).
>
> * CI software based on Jenkins, unless someone thinks there's a better
> alternative.
>
> * Use autoscaling groups and improve staggered build + test steps to
> achieve higher parallelism and shorter feedback times.
>
> * Switch to a branching model based on stable master + integration
> branch. PRs are merged into dev/integration which runs extended
> nightly tests, which are
> then merged into master, preferably in an automated way after
> successful extended testing.
> Master is always tested, and always buildable. Release branches or
> tags in master as usual for releases.
>
> * Build + test feedback time targeting less than 15 minutes.
> (Currently a build in a 16x core takes 7m). This involves lot of
> refactoring of tests, move expensive tests / big smoke tests to
> nightlies on the integration branch, also tests on IoT devices / power
> and performance regressions...
>
> * Add code coverage and other quality metrics.
>
> * Eliminate warnings and treat warnings as errors. We have spent time
> tracking down "undefined behaviour" bugs that could have been caught
> by compiler warnings.
>
> Is there something I'm missing or additional things that come to your
> mind that you would wish to add?
>
> Pedro.
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message