mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steffen Rochel <steffenroc...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Apache MXNet (incubating) Python Docker Images
Date Thu, 18 Oct 2018 05:18:00 GMT
+1 on Kellen’s comments and suggestion.
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 12:39 PM kellen sunderland <
kellen.sunderland@gmail.com> wrote:

> This feels like something we should get a little data on before making a
> decision, but I also don't have a strong opinion.  I would bias towards
> pushing something that might be imperfect and moving on to develop other
> improvements for users rather than determining a 'perfect' solution.
>
> The questions/tradeoffs I see are (1) should we support multiple python
> versions in the first place, which requires extra work on our part but
> supports more users and (2) should we favor forwards or backwards
> compatibility, i.e. should we prioritize supporting existing users or
> prioritize making something that won't cause future problems for new and
> exiting users.
>
> The best data I can find with a quick google is the annual Jetbrains survey
> which shows python2 went from 47% in 2017 to 25% in 2018:
> https://www.jetbrains.com/research/devecosystem-2017/python/
> https://www.jetbrains.com/research/devecosystem-2018/python/
>
> So python2 usage is trending sharply down but is not yet low enough to
> ignore which I think means we should try and support both on Dockerhub (1).
>
> I don't see backwards compatibility with existing Docker users is a major
> concern given these Dockerfiles haven't been supported for a long time.  I
> would prioritize forwards compatibility (2) and assume we want to create
> something that will remain compatible for as long as possible.
>
> So I would push both python2 and python3 images, but make python 3.5 the
> default version, and python2 a version with a postfixed py2 tag in
> Dockerhub.
>
> Thanks to Mu (and others?) for original creating this Dockerhub images, I
> used to use them and found them very convenient, and to you Meghna for
> updating them.  I think basing them on the pip packages is also a good way
> to lower maintenance burden and make sure we leverage the great work Sheng
> has done to create those packages.
>
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 11:52 AM Meghna Baijal <meghnabaijal2017@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I am currently in the process of updating the python docker images for
> > Apache MXNet such that they are built on top of the pip binaries.
> > Until now these were built to use python 2.7 but with an upcoming PR I am
> > also adding python 3.5 docker images. I would like to know the
> community’s
> > preference on whether I should keep the *Python 2.7 Docker image as the
> > default or should I move to Python 3.5 as the default version*?
> >
> > [1] The new python2 dockerfiles and build script can be found here.
> > <
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/tree/master/docker/docker-python
> > >
> > [2] The PR for python3 images is in progress and is here.
> > <https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12791>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Meghna Baijal
> >
>

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