mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pedro Larroy <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Slim down scope of CI
Date Wed, 28 Aug 2019 17:47:57 GMT
Gathering this data would be useful to make a decision.

I myself have invested lots of time porting to other platforms such as PI,
JETSON, Arm or Android. If the community is interested in maintaining a
platform there should be action. For a long time I haven't seen much effort
there. Ideally I like to see several platforms windows for portability
reasons. But I question there's bandwidth for that.

On Wednesday, August 28, 2019, Aaron Markham <>
> I have an open issue about gathering data per platform install so there
> be an informed discussion on prioritization or even cutting platforms.
> Until then... I wouldn't cut one.
> I would like to hear the pros and cons for dropping some native platform
> support in favor of containers. But... For windows I believe Nvidia still
> hasn't provided a way to access the GPU from docker on most windows OSs.
> that's true, that would imply we shouldn't drop windows assuming that
> windows users will be able to run things in docker. That being said, why
> support every range of possibilty of blas or mkl or opencv? Why not come
> with a set of strict dependencies for windows to simplify the build, CI,
> and binary distribution?
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2019, 09:30 Pedro Larroy <>
> wrote:
>> Hi
>> I would like to propose a discussion to slim down CI by dropping some
>> which are of questionable value, other which have received little
>> support:
>> - Drop centos: we can't support every distro, if anything we should
>> specify which versions of base libraries are needed and test for the
>> stable release of Ubuntu. I don't see much value in testing different
>> distribution flavours. Not sure what was the rationale for adding CentOS
>> the past but this might no longer apply.
>> - Drop windows: windows has received little attention from the community
>> and mostly has served as a gatekeeping from CI.
>> Dropping windows would allow to migrate to a more advanced CI framework
>> such as Drone or a fully container based one given that Jenkins has
quite a
>> bit of baggage and for the most part we are testing on containers.
>> Pedro.

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