Sorry I meant to say next 'Regarding the *minor* release'. On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 5:27 AM kellen sunderland < [email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks for transparently setting a rough timeline Steffen. I think this > will go a long way in helping the community plan their work, even if the > details change somewhat on the road to the release. > > Regarding the major release: I would propose we unify TensorRT with the > subgraph operator work. > > Regarding the patch release: There were a few minor stack/buffer > overflows exposed by ASAN that have been addressed. It's probably a good > idea to include them in a patch release, as they at best result in > non-deterministic behaviour. > > -Kellen > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:39 AM Steffen Rochel <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I updated >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Project+Proposals+for+next+MXNet+Release >> , >> removed the completed items from 1.3 release and would like to kick off >> discussion about the next release. Please suggest what you would like to >> see included in the next release together with link to design proposal >> (appropriately for the size and complexity of the proposal) or suggest >> changes. >> I suggest to target the next release for December 2018 to frame the >> discussion. >> Lets include review of >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Roadmap - time to >> update and discuss changes. >> >> From the 1.3 release we had discussion regarding >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/11849 and resolution in >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12412 . >> Are you aware of critical issues and feedback from user which we should >> consider for a potential 1.3.1 patch release. Should we include PR 12412 >> in >> a potential patch release? >> >> Regards, >> Steffen >> >
