Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6C4B200D54 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:21:44 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id E539C160C0D; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 11:21:44 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 0F1EF160BF2 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:21:43 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 16196 invoked by uid 500); 8 Dec 2017 11:21:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@mxnet.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 16178 invoked by uid 99); 8 Dec 2017 11:21:42 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 08 Dec 2017 11:21:42 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 86BC11805C7 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 11:21:42 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.379 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.379 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd3-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=googlemail.com Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6s7ZCgatUElm for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 11:21:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-lf0-f41.google.com (mail-lf0-f41.google.com [209.85.215.41]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 8DB5D5F3CC for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 11:21:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf0-f41.google.com with SMTP id 74so11553770lfs.0 for ; Fri, 08 Dec 2017 03:21:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=YQlbsf6B0WepzfsB34MJ3/WZM0OJZcoUZrTiQJf6nQI=; b=g8ZPR9Q6MfNpCnWk3N1yNH/Gk9baPVWigSil5GMz0V7gkk2dlP5ycyYwkpnQJgIOVs Rn2tLF/iAW15RSnHSfDyxxtA4JXofq35gEWux2C6fxk84+E/SPnYzoKzOWFO0XsTOPGT 9BoAIj7oqvomMu3+Uj63ACg/nXv4xDqQpPwTWUqahmDtiUYbdafCMchhq0e2W2oYzJK0 jMp5uFMBkXqG50nwlPVQLWlDaTtwCuNyiRFwHhiqoZg0gC0XCaGMx1maYqFH4W5wrN6k g4vrdYQpGQS03mq6qR9MBjwufktkNnXrcjewPUyG54smd1zIis1xX/jFkjqovi4kTfMp dXSw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=YQlbsf6B0WepzfsB34MJ3/WZM0OJZcoUZrTiQJf6nQI=; b=dBnymusuObk2ALaebKoXYnDhrdOt+WMPUgErqbNQB6pQ386IANHMymIgtLkxLNaGkR JAXFynLpX1ct2QcylftYWG4GzwjvQQILWCO3yKamPRKVZ05VotZIo9fBW7cnfvsONeok bbxus2rXZZqcG8dkx6Er3r3QUurt6QPYzI8vZ7fAJgUmBJ1fhqs0orOpLATThrmY8MaA gr0S9zejdm6ZzpOGw2sXvU8xfrSMxuEmTxQhHtKqvH9CI8z55KPYn529EeuNTdSsNYlA /04E6plrbOqhy/zThaEUGBNS8T7n5w5amWK76c4gKWZ3gH666y+buq2g81vc+7Ameb2L 1kEQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX5m2kHs4OAPbVbgipIGZPQrJKjM9whVITb/kLQVZSdd7JggYmsM RXsm9YbB0SnWU6AIinzDy9Sld4q6iPmHKNgrnkg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMbShpJZXMEI7B8nqfBQ3Nd/Xd9BVMNI0ND1oJGeuO0XYd8cg+VZUWEUIbTT4Qt3BBqRDBL5Gp6dlLamXjXwmnw= X-Received: by 10.25.56.68 with SMTP id d4mr14863353lfj.186.1512732098730; Fri, 08 Dec 2017 03:21:38 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.25.19.160 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 03:20:58 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Marco de Abreu Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:20:58 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [VOTE] Disable Appveyor To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045e9ac462a01c055fd263a3" archived-at: Fri, 08 Dec 2017 11:21:45 -0000 --f403045e9ac462a01c055fd263a3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Who's going to maintain and fix problems which will arise with travis CI? Due to the protected master branch, this can cause some serious blocking issues. I think it should be tested and everything fixed before we re-enable travis CI. My proposal is to wait for stage 3 (new features) of the new CI launch until we start working on Travis CI. On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Pedro Larroy wrote: > Can somebody re-enable travis CI so we can do mac builds? currently > the unit tests don't build in Mac because Mac is not tested. > > On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Pedro Larroy > wrote: > > +1 > > > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 1:02 AM, Chris Olivier > wrote: > >> +1 > >> > >> On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 3:57 PM, kellen sunderland < > >> kellen.sunderland@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> It's using a fixed binary version of openblas and opencv, so the > versions > >>> there might be different than what we use. It's compiling with > profiler > >>> enabled. A few build flags. However all it's doing is building, it > >>> doesn't test. > >>> > >>> The best lines to compare would be this: > >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/blob/master/Jenkinsfile#L236 > >>> to this: > >>> https://ci.appveyor.com/project/ApacheSoftwareFoundation/ > >>> incubator-mxnet/build/1.0.4047#L96 > >>> to get an idea of the (minor) differences. > >>> > >>> > >>> On Dec 8, 2017 12:51 AM, "Chris Olivier" > wrote: > >>> > >>> Does Appveyor do anything that Jenkins isn't doing? Anything at all? > >>> > >>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 3:41 PM, kellen sunderland < > >>> kellen.sunderland@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> > @Chris nope, AppVeyor has only ever supported Windows. > >>> > > >>> > I think some people are thinking of Travis CI, which is a pretty > great > >>> > managed CI that does support MacOS/Linux. I'd be in favour of > setting up > >>> a > >>> > Mac build there. At a minimum we can at least start a new compiling > task > >>> > with clang in the new CI. > >>> > > >>> > On Dec 7, 2017 11:41 PM, "Indhu" wrote: > >>> > > >>> > > +1 > >>> > > > >>> > > My build is waiting in queue for 13 hours now. > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2017, 11:26 AM kellen sunderland < > >>> > > kellen.sunderland@gmail.com> > >>> > > wrote: > >>> > > > >>> > > > Background: Appveyor is a free-to-use (for opensource) CI system > >>> that > >>> > > > specializes in providing support for Windows environments. > Appveyor > >>> is > >>> > > > currently running a very simple windows build for MXNet. > >>> Specifically > >>> > we > >>> > > > are generating build files via cmake, and then building with > Visual > >>> > > Studio > >>> > > > 14 with fairly standard build options. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Problem: AppVeyor frequently slows down our release process and > has > >>> > been > >>> > > > made redundant by the new CI system's windows builds. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Action: Let's remove AppVeyor and rely on the new CI's windows > build > >>> > > > systems which has very similar functionality. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Vote will close Monday Dec 11th and will rely on lazy consensus. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > -Kellen > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > --f403045e9ac462a01c055fd263a3--