mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marco de Abreu <marco.g.ab...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: assimilation of mshadow into the MXNet codebase
Date Fri, 12 Jun 2020 22:43:25 GMT
Hi Sheng,

since this is a "large one off code contribution", the policy [1] states
that they should be brought in through a software grant.

Best regards,
Marco

[1]: https://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works/legal.html

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 11:41 PM Sheng Zha <zhasheng@apache.org> wrote:

> To mentors,
>
> Do we the PPMC need to fill out IP clearance for this code donation?
>
> -sz
>
> On 2019/04/24 21:19:49, Sheng Zha <zhasheng@apache.org> wrote:
> > The community has agreed to donate mshadow to the mxnet code base. I
> will start the migration and build logic changes soon.
> >
> > -sz
> >
> > On 2019/04/07 21:47:39, Sheng Zha <zhasheng@apache.org> wrote:
> > > I agree it would make development easier to donate mshadow to mxnet
> code base, since mshadow is only used in MXNet. I support donating the
> mshadow code to mxnet and I started an RFC for this in mshadow [1].
> > >
> > > [1] https://github.com/dmlc/mshadow/issues/373
> > >
> > > -sz
> > >
> > > On 2019/04/06 04:38:19, Tianqi Chen <tqchen@cs.washington.edu> wrote:
> > > > Technically, mshadow is sufficient for MXNet. Adopting other
> libraries (
> > > > eigen or xtensor) will unnecessarily increase the codebase complexity
> > > > without any additional gains.
> > > >
> > > > Given that mshadow is only used by mxnet. I do support donating it
> into
> > > > mxnet codebase.
> > > > To respect the original mshadow community. I would recommend
> starting a
> > > > community RFC In the mshadow github issue for a week, before we
> start the
> > > > migrating process.
> > > > Also, I would recommend a rebase merge just like the case of
> MXNet.jl code
> > > > base to preserve the contribution history.
> > > >
> > > > Tianqi
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:25 PM Alfredo Luque
> > > > <alfredo.luque@airbnb.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Do you have a link to both of these proposals?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 20:14 Anirudh Acharya <
> anirudhkrec@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Pedro,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > mshadow is mostly used for tensor arithmetic. There have been
> discussions
> > > > > > about including it within mxnet. I think it is a good idea.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As a more long term solution using libraries like eigen to
> perform linear
> > > > > > algebra operations was also suggested by anirudh2290@. I think
> xtensor(
> > > > > > https://github.com/QuantStack/xtensor ) can also be a candidate
> here.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -
> > > > > > Anirudh
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 7:03 PM Pedro Larroy <
> > > > > pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Some developers have noticed that working in mshadow is
> cumbersome as
> > > > > > > it's a 3rdparty subrepo.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Since mshadow is a bunch of headers which don't have much
of
> > > > > > > independent tests / library functionality, me and other
> developers
> > > > > > > believe that it would be good to assimilate this code in
the
> > > > > > > repository for ease of contribution and changes without
having
> to go
> > > > > > > trough contortions to test PRs that modify mshadow.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Would anybody oppose this change?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks and have a nice weekend.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Pedro.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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