From dev-return-5518-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@mxnet.incubator.apache.org Wed Feb 13 20:50:47 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id B1BD1180674 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 21:50:46 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 72128 invoked by uid 500); 13 Feb 2019 20:50:45 -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 72117 invoked by uid 99); 13 Feb 2019 20:50:45 -0000 Received: from ui-eu-01.ponee.io (HELO localhost) (176.9.59.70) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 20:50:45 +0000 Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2019 20:50:44 -0000 To: X-Mailer: LuaSocket 3.0-rc1 References: <4750B8A9-2E26-4205-A3AB-59F49FDA17FA@classsoftware.com> In-Reply-To: x-ponymail-agent: PonyMail Composer/0.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Subject: Re: [RESTARTING][VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.4.0.rc2 Message-ID: x-ponymail-sender: fd9da504b63c1736e52a84ae954da2a315f2f28a From: Sheng Zha MIME-Version: 1.0 Thanks for making me aware of the issue. I started the fix here [1]. And thanks to Qing Lan and Zach Kimberg for pinging me and helping with isolating the problem. -sz [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/14148 On 2019/02/13 19:45:41, Aaron Markham wrote: > Sheng, thanks for being so proactive, but adding license headers to > the markdown files in #14142 breaks the website as I warned. I caught > it before it went live. > I've disabled website publishing until this situation is resolved. > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 10:59 AM Sheng Zha wrote: > > > > Update: All license issues mentioned in the general vote from Luciano (pom > > files, docker files, docs) have been fixed on master [1][2]. > > > > Let me know if there's more to address. > > > > -sz > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/14138 > > [2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/14142 > > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 7:54 AM Michael Wall wrote: > > > > > So is the plan option 3? I have seen tickets fixing licenses, so good work > > > there. When a vote is started on dev@mxnet.a.o, include wording about not > > > waiting the full 72 hours since this is just updating licensing. Get as > > > many +1 votes as you can on both the release and not waiting then move on > > > to IPMC. The vote on general@incubator.a.o should still stay open 72 > > > hours. I will look at it as soon as it is posted, but maybe reach out to > > > the other mentors directly asking for their help to review as soon as it is > > > out. The goal is to have the 3 or more +1 votes and more positive then > > > negative as soon as the 72 hours hits. > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 2:44 AM Justin Mclean > > > wrote: > > > > > > > forgot to CC dev > > > > > > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > > > > > > > > > From: Justin Mclean > > > > > Subject: Re: [RESTARTING][VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) > > > > version 1.4.0.rc2 > > > > > Date: 13 February 2019 at 6:43:48 pm AEDT > > > > > To: Michael Wall > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > >> Option 1: > > > > >> Do nothing. I don't know how a RESTARTED vote works. > > > > > > > > > > I don’t believe there is such a concept. > > > > > > > > > >> Option 2: > > > > >> Start another vote thread on general@incubator.a.o pointing to the > > > > original vote thread on dev@mxnet.a.o and the canceled vote thread. > > > > > > > > > > It may end up with the same outcome. > > > > > > > > > >> Option 3: > > > > >> 1 - Fix the header issues. > > > > > > > > > >> 3 - Start a vote thread on general@incubator.a.o pointing to the new > > > > vote thread from step 2. Will likely need to be open 72 hours. > > > > > > > > > > Just be aware it can take longer, sometime much longer, to get the 3 +1 > > > > IPMC votes. > > > > > > > > > >> Tough position to be in with Horovod being released. > > > > > > > > > > Which show the risk of tying in your release cycle with a non Apache > > > > product. IMO you need to be independent of 3rd party releases and not > > > tied > > > > to their milestones. If they wanted to include a particular unreleased > > > > version of ASF software, you should started the release a long time ahead > > > > of time just in case problems were encountered issues.This probably > > > > wouldn't be an issue if you made more frequent releases, it’s easier to > > > > check compliance with frequent releases so the 3rd party could just take > > > > the last good release and go with that. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Justin > > > > > > > > > > > >