incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache MXNet (incubating) version 1.7.0.rc1
Date Wed, 05 Aug 2020 03:21:42 GMT
Hi -

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 4, 2020, at 8:01 PM, Justin Mclean <> wrote:
> Hi,
>> 1.  Change all MXNet to Apache MXNet (incubating) from documentation where it necessary
>> 2.  Change maven package description ” MXNet Engine Adapter for DJL” to  "Deep
Java Library (DJL) Engine Adapter for Apache MXNet" for clarification
> Thanks for doing that. ASF generally prefers “powdered by” so I would double check
with trademarks (trademarks@a.o) if this is acceptable use. [1]

That’s “Powered by”, but “for” can also be acceptable. Agreed that trademark@ is
the place for the PPMC to ask.


>> For [3], this package contains no source code from Apache MXNet and only contains
the binary that built from source through the Apache MXNet source code without modification.
It also brought necessary License and binary attribution from Apache MXNet.
> I still have some concerns here’s for instance is a page [2] that says:
>    • The binaries are built from source from Apache MXNet without modification.
>    • The binaries are obtained from the Apache MXNet python pip wheel.
> The issue here is those pip “releases" contain unreleased versions of Apache MxNet
[2] and probably should not have been released by the MXNet project and shouldn’t be used
by the general public. [4] ("must not be distributed through channels which encourage use
by anyone outside the project development community”)
> There is currently a draft policy on downstream distribution [5] but I don’t think
it covers this situation. Now I would agree that the ALv2 allow you to use Apache MXNet code,
even if it is unreleased, but I’m not sure if you can say the the resulting product is “for
MXNet". That may be need a discussion on the legal@a.o or trademarks@a.o lists.
> And to be clear this is not really a DJL issue at this point, it's more an issue for
the PPMC of MXNet to sort out.
> Thanks,
> Justin
> 1.
> 2.
> 3.
> 4.
> 5.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message