mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Meghna Baijal <meghnabaijal2...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Release plan - MXNET 1.0.1
Date Thu, 25 Jan 2018 05:06:10 GMT
I agree. If the release candidate is being cut from the master branch, it
should be considered a minor release.

Anyway the effort involved in the release process is exactly the same in
either case.

Thanks,
Meghna

On Jan 24, 2018 8:56 PM, "Marco de Abreu" <marco.g.abreu@googlemail.com>
wrote:

> Are there any particular reasons why we are classifying this release as
> patch instead of minor release? As far as I know, we don't have any tests
> in place to determine API changes and thus can't guarantee that this is an
> actual patch release. Considering the fact that PRs have been merged
> without having semantic versioning in place, this could be quite risky.
>
> Instead, I'd rather propose to make a minor release 1.1 instead of patch
> release 1.0.1.
>
> -Marco
>
> Am 24.01.2018 7:20 nachm. schrieb "Zha, Sheng" <zhasheng@amazon.com>:
>
> > There’s an experimental API for text data indexing and embedding in
> > mx.contrib.text.
> >
> > - Sent by my thumb
> >
> > > On Jan 24, 2018, at 7:08 PM, Chris Olivier <cjolivier01@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > the profiling PR contains a small breaking change, but i don’t think
> it’s
> > > going into 1.0.1
> > >
> > >> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 6:48 PM Haibin Lin <haibin.lin.aws@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi everyone,
> > >>
> > >> Since the plan was to cut a branch from the master branch, the code
> will
> > >> include changes other than the bug fix PRs noted in the release note.
> Is
> > >> anyone aware of any API changes in the current MXNet master branch? In
> > >> particular, are there backward incompatible ones?
> > >>
> > >> Best,
> > >> Haibin
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 11:25 AM, Haibin Lin <
> haibin.lin.aws@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi Sheng,
> > >>>
> > >>> 1. I've been following the discussion on the branching & versioning
> > >>> thread. Features like MKLDNN integration should not go to patch
> release
> > >>> 1.0.1, and it's risky to merge large PRs right before the release.
> I've
> > >>> removed the MKLDNN section from the release note.
> https://cwiki.apache
> > .
> > >>> org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+
> > >>> 1.0.1+Release+Notes
> > >>>
> > >>> 2. I agree that we should aim for better test coverage & stable
CI,
> and
> > >>> get those disabled/flaky tests fixed eventually. Fixing these
> requires
> > >>> efforts from the community and I strongly encourage contributors to
> > help.
> > >>> Removing the corresponding feature from the release doesn't sound
> > >> practical
> > >>> since users might be already using some of those. I suggest that we
> > keep
> > >>> track of these tests on Apache Wiki and make sure they are addressed
> > for
> > >>> the release after 1.0.1.
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi everyone,
> > >>>
> > >>> In terms of the current status for this release, all critical bug
> fixes
> > >>> are merged (to the best of my knowledge) and we have made good
> progress
> > >>> fixing license issues. As Meghna mentioned, a list of open questions
> > >>> regarding license is at
> > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/
> > >>> MXNet+Source+Licenses section D - it would be great if we can get
> more
> > >>> clarification/help/feedback from Apache mentors.
> > >>>
> > >>> I suggest that we shoot for code freeze for 1.0.1 rc0 this Wednesday.
> > >> Does
> > >>> anyone have concern or objection on this?
> > >>>
> > >>> Best,
> > >>> Haibin
> > >>>
> > >>> On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 7:51 AM, Steffen Rochel <
> > steffenrochel@gmail.com
> > >>>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Hi Sheng -
> > >>>> 1. branch usage and versioning - lets converge our discussion and
> > >> document
> > >>>> the agreement on wiki. I started a draft summarizing my
> understanding
> > of
> > >>>> the proposal at
> > >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Release+
> > >>>> Versioning+and+Branching.
> > >>>> Lets work together to refine and clarify the draft, so we have
> clarity
> > >>>> going forward. I'm inviting everyone to contribute to this
> discussion.
> > >>>> As MKLDNN integration is not ready yet and we want to release all
> the
> > >> good
> > >>>> improvements including updates in tutorials and documentation I
> > suggest
> > >> we
> > >>>> move forward with the release asap. As we don't have major features
> or
> > >>>> non-compatible API changes (to best of my knowledge) I think it
is
> > >>>> appropriate to label the release as 1.0.1.
> > >>>> Note: This label indicates a patch release. Patch releases should
be
> > >>>> created from the related release branch. As we didn't plan for
it
> and
> > to
> > >>>> minimize overhead I suggest we make a one time exception to cut
the
> > >> 1.0.1
> > >>>> release from master branch and clearly communicate in release notes.
> > >> Going
> > >>>> forward we should follow the methodology for versioning and
> branching
> > to
> > >>>> whatever we agree on.
> > >>>> 2. Disabled tests: I agree with your concerns that we had to disable
> > 13
> > >>>> tests due to non-deterministic behavior (see issues
> > >>>> <https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/labels/Flaky>).
I'm
> > calling
> > >> on
> > >>>> all contributors to help to resolve the non-deterministic behavior,
> so
> > >> we
> > >>>> can improve our test coverage. As we discussed offline, lets tests
> > >>>> manually
> > >>>> short term, document the known issue in the release notes and
> > prioritize
> > >>>> efforts post 1.0.1 release.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Regards,
> > >>>> Steffen
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 5:05 PM Sheng Zha <zhasheng@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Hi Haibin,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Thanks for leading this. I suggest that we hold onto this release
> > >> until
> > >>>> we
> > >>>>> have clarity on the following items.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> 1. branch usage and versioning
> > >>>>> Given that we are past 1.0 and we're changing APIs, I'd like
to
> > >> suggest
> > >>>>> that we first agree on how
> > >>>>> versioning works in mxnet. If we follow semantic versioning,
it
> would
> > >>>>> suggest that features like
> > >>>>> MKL-DNN should go at least into 1.1 (minor version change)
instead
> of
> > >>>>> 1.0.1 (patch release).
> > >>>>> Also, assuming that new release will come from a new forked
> branch, I
> > >>>>> suggest that we clarify on how to
> > >>>>> name the branches too.
> > >>>>> You can find relevant thread at
> > >>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c52f8353f63c1e63b2646ec
> > >>>> 3b08d9a8180a1381787d777b41b8ac69f@%3Cdev.mxnet.apache.org%3E
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> 2. disabled tests
> > >>>>> For the purpose of stabilizing test automation system, many
tests
> > were
> > >>>>> disabled. In order to avoid
> > >>>>> releasing untested features, we should mitigate the situation
of
> > >> having
> > >>>>> disabled tests.
> > >>>>> That means we can fix the tests before the release, or remove
the
> > >>>>> corresponding feature from release
> > >>>>> (might be hard to do, e.g. for optimizer). Otherwise, we must
> > >>>> collectively
> > >>>>> decide that a feature is
> > >>>>> OK to release without tests.
> > >>>>> The thread on this topic can be found at
> > >>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/addab1937bfcf09b5dfa15c
> > >>>> 1149ddcebd084f1c4bf4e10a73770fb35@%3Cdev.mxnet.apache.org%3E
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> We can proceed on the release with more confidence once we
have
> > >> clarity.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Best regards,
> > >>>>> -sz
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> On 2018-01-10 15:33, Haibin Lin <haibin.lin.aws@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > >>>>>> I am starting the process to prepare for MXNET 1.0.1 release.
I
> have
> > >>>>>> drafted release notes
> > >>>>>> (*
> > >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+
> > >>>> MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.0.1+Release+Notes
> > >>>>>> <
> > >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+
> > >>>> MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.0.1+Release+Notes
> > >>>>>> *)
> > >>>>>> to cover the tasks under this release.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> A release candidate will be cut on Monday 22nd Jan, 2018
and
> voting
> > >>>> will
> > >>>>>> commence from then till Thursday 25th Jan, 2018. If you
have any
> > >>>>> additional
> > >>>>>> features in progress and would like to include it in this
release,
> > >>>> please
> > >>>>>> assure they have been merged by Thursday 18th Jan, 2018
with
> comment
> > >>>> so I
> > >>>>>> may update the release notes.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Feel free to add any other comments/suggestions.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>> Haibin
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
>

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