mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Xingjian SHI <xsh...@connect.ust.hk>
Subject Re: [Discuss] MXNet Python &lt; 3.6 Support Deprecation
Date Wed, 06 Nov 2019 07:15:27 GMT
I don’t think we should drop Python 3.5 now because Ubuntu 16.04 ships with that version.
I suggest that we should revisit it next year.

Best,
Xingjian
________________________________
From: Sheng Zha <zhasheng@apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2019 10:49 AM
To: dev@mxnet.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Discuss] MXNet Python &lt; 3.6 Support Deprecation

Good summary. At the start the discussion thread my ask is to announce the intention of py2
deprecation in the next release, and then actually deprecate py2 in the next major release.
Thus, the appropriate timing for dropping py2 support in CI should be the start of the next
major release. The py35 vs py36 discussion will not affect the outcome of py2 deprecation.

BTW, one alternative option to a formal voting in the Apache way is to through lazy consensus
[1], which could apply more in our project. Given the positive feedback in this discussion
thread, I will assume lazy consensus in 72hrs on py2 deprecation as defined above.

[1] https://community.apache.org/committers/lazyConsensus.html

On 2019/08/27 00:19:14, Marco de Abreu <marco.g.abreu@gmail.com> wrote:
> Pedro,
>
> thanks for already starting these efforts, but it might be too early for
> that. Right now, this is a discussion thread where we try to gather
> different opinions in order to lay a good base for a future voting thread.
> In there, we would define the detailed timeline, versions etc. Until the
> vote has passed, I'd say that it's too early to draw any conclusions. So
> far, there are two open discussion points:
>
> 1. Which Python version to support. 3.5 vs 3.6 is currently in the
> discussion due to Ubuntu 16.04 being shipped with 3.5 while the biggest
> market share being 3.6 as of now.
> 2. When to do the deprecation. EOY to match with official Python 2
> deprecation, in 1.5 years to be in line with Ubuntu 16.04 LTS or with the
> next major release (2.0) to adhere to semantic versioning.
>
> Once these points (and any future ones) have been properly discussed and
> the community came to an agreement, we can formalize it with a voting
> thread. Until then, I'd recommend to refrain from any actions or
> user-facing communication regarding this topic.
>
> Best regards,
> Marco
>
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 1:29 AM Pedro Larroy <pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I have sent a PR that removes Python2 from CI. But was closed. I thought
> > everyone was +1 on this one. This would remove quite a bit of load on CI:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/15990
> >
> > If it's not the right time to do this, what steps do we need to take?
> >
> > Pedro.
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 1:27 AM Leonard Lausen <leonard@lausen.nl> wrote:
> >
> > > Lieven Govaerts <lgo@apache.org> writes:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 at 17:01, Leonard Lausen <leonard@lausen.nl>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi,
> > > >>
> > > >> Pedro stated "Seems 3.6 is a reasonable choice." and there have been
a
> > > >> few +1 after Chaitanya's reply to Pedro. I would like to check if
> > these
> > > >> only refer to Chaitanya's mail about a dedicated "improvement" effort
> > or
> > > >> about dropping 3.5.
> > > >>
> > > >> Thus two questions:
> > > >>
> > > >> 1) Are there any concerns about dropping Python 3.5? Now is your
> > chance
> > > to
> > > >> speak up if you think so.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > > Ubuntu 16.04 LTS defaults to Python 3.5.x . The LTS releases are
> > > supported
> > > > for 5 years, so for 16.04 LTS it ends in 1.5 years.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not saying you should wait for 1.5 more years, people can upgrade
> > to
> > > > 18.04 LTS after all, but may I suggest you make this switch in a major
> > > > release only? More specifically, ensure that Python 3.6-only code
> > doesn't
> > > > accidentally gets merged into a 1.5.X patch release.
> > > >
> > > > thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Lieven
> > >
> > > Hi Lieven,
> > >
> > > thanks. I believe the Python version compatibility falls under the
> > > semantic versioning umbrella of things not to break within any 1.x
> > > release. Thus above suggestion would be with respect to a 2.x release or
> > > experimental / preview / new features added to 1.x, without affecting
> > > existing 1.x features. It would not affect 1.5.x patch releases.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Leonard
> > >
> > >
> > > >> 2) Should new MXNet 1.x (experimental?) functionality (for example
> > numpy
> > > >> compatible interface) only target the Python versions to be supported
> > in
> > > >> MXNet 2? The current plan is to make many MXNet 2 features available
> > as
> > > >> "opt-in" in MXNet 1.x. Supporting older Python versions on MXNet 1
for
> > > >> these features may impact design and functionality and create
> > > >> unnecessary technical debt.
> > >
> >
>

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