3rdparty packages as submodules

[Chris Olivier <cj...@gmail.com>]

All,

I often find it desirable to have a method for 3rdparty packages to be
included (possibly optionally) in a 3rdparty directory.   We do this with
'cub' to some degree, but it's in the root and is actually a fork in the
dmlc repository.  Some samples of what might go in there:

1) Intel OpenMP (llvm-openmp) -- In order to use Intel OMP by default
2) gperftools -- In order to build statically with -fPIC, which isn't the
case with the general distribution
3) mkl-dnn -- In order to build and have debug information available for
mkl-dnn (and possibly submit bugfixes)

What do you all think?

-Chris

Re: 3rdparty packages as submodules

[Chris Olivier <cj...@gmail.com>]

Git pointing to url, MIT license, for instance

On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 3:01 PM Hen <ba...@apache.org> wrote:

> What's the license of each?
>
> By submodule do you mean git pointing to a url of a specific tag/branch, or
> copying the actual code directly in?
>
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Stephen Bull <sb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I like 3rdparty, and definitely helps newcomers too. As long as it's kept
> > relatively clean and up-to-date of course (not sure if that's a case for
> or
> > against however!). :)
> >
> > On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 at 19:25 Chris Olivier <cj...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I support putting gtest in 3rdparty as well. That being said, which of
> > > these should we be storing in the Apache repository and which do we
> pull
> > > from their source repositories. What’s standard practice in this case
> for
> > > Apache projects?
> > >
> > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 5:54 PM Pedro Larroy <
> > pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > We could also add gtest as well for example.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I would like to point out that is quite cumbersome to get your code
> > > > tested and ready before sending a PR, this includes installing
> > > > cpplint, pylint, gtest…
> > > >
> > > > Installing gtest and bootstrapping it is not completely trivial.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Eric Xie <jx...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > I'm fine with a 3rdparty folder. Not sure about apache legal.
> > > > >
> > > > > On 2017-11-17 10:25, Chris Olivier <cj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> All,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I often find it desirable to have a method for 3rdparty packages
> to
> > be
> > > > >> included (possibly optionally) in a 3rdparty directory.   We do
> this
> > > > with
> > > > >> 'cub' to some degree, but it's in the root and is actually a fork
> in
> > > the
> > > > >> dmlc repository.  Some samples of what might go in there:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> 1) Intel OpenMP (llvm-openmp) -- In order to use Intel OMP by
> > default
> > > > >> 2) gperftools -- In order to build statically with -fPIC, which
> > isn't
> > > > the
> > > > >> case with the general distribution
> > > > >> 3) mkl-dnn -- In order to build and have debug information
> available
> > > for
> > > > >> mkl-dnn (and possibly submit bugfixes)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> What do you all think?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -Chris
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: 3rdparty packages as submodules

[Hen <ba...@apache.org>]

What's the license of each?

By submodule do you mean git pointing to a url of a specific tag/branch, or
copying the actual code directly in?

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Stephen Bull <sb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I like 3rdparty, and definitely helps newcomers too. As long as it's kept
> relatively clean and up-to-date of course (not sure if that's a case for or
> against however!). :)
>
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 at 19:25 Chris Olivier <cj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I support putting gtest in 3rdparty as well. That being said, which of
> > these should we be storing in the Apache repository and which do we pull
> > from their source repositories. What’s standard practice in this case for
> > Apache projects?
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 5:54 PM Pedro Larroy <
> pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > We could also add gtest as well for example.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I would like to point out that is quite cumbersome to get your code
> > > tested and ready before sending a PR, this includes installing
> > > cpplint, pylint, gtest…
> > >
> > > Installing gtest and bootstrapping it is not completely trivial.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Kind regards.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Eric Xie <jx...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > I'm fine with a 3rdparty folder. Not sure about apache legal.
> > > >
> > > > On 2017-11-17 10:25, Chris Olivier <cj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> All,
> > > >>
> > > >> I often find it desirable to have a method for 3rdparty packages to
> be
> > > >> included (possibly optionally) in a 3rdparty directory.   We do this
> > > with
> > > >> 'cub' to some degree, but it's in the root and is actually a fork in
> > the
> > > >> dmlc repository.  Some samples of what might go in there:
> > > >>
> > > >> 1) Intel OpenMP (llvm-openmp) -- In order to use Intel OMP by
> default
> > > >> 2) gperftools -- In order to build statically with -fPIC, which
> isn't
> > > the
> > > >> case with the general distribution
> > > >> 3) mkl-dnn -- In order to build and have debug information available
> > for
> > > >> mkl-dnn (and possibly submit bugfixes)
> > > >>
> > > >> What do you all think?
> > > >>
> > > >> -Chris
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: 3rdparty packages as submodules

[Stephen Bull <sb...@gmail.com>]

I like 3rdparty, and definitely helps newcomers too. As long as it's kept
relatively clean and up-to-date of course (not sure if that's a case for or
against however!). :)

On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 at 19:25 Chris Olivier <cj...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I support putting gtest in 3rdparty as well. That being said, which of
> these should we be storing in the Apache repository and which do we pull
> from their source repositories. What’s standard practice in this case for
> Apache projects?
>
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 5:54 PM Pedro Larroy <pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > We could also add gtest as well for example.
> >
> >
> >
> > I would like to point out that is quite cumbersome to get your code
> > tested and ready before sending a PR, this includes installing
> > cpplint, pylint, gtest…
> >
> > Installing gtest and bootstrapping it is not completely trivial.
> >
> >
> >
> > Kind regards.
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Eric Xie <jx...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > I'm fine with a 3rdparty folder. Not sure about apache legal.
> > >
> > > On 2017-11-17 10:25, Chris Olivier <cj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> All,
> > >>
> > >> I often find it desirable to have a method for 3rdparty packages to be
> > >> included (possibly optionally) in a 3rdparty directory.   We do this
> > with
> > >> 'cub' to some degree, but it's in the root and is actually a fork in
> the
> > >> dmlc repository.  Some samples of what might go in there:
> > >>
> > >> 1) Intel OpenMP (llvm-openmp) -- In order to use Intel OMP by default
> > >> 2) gperftools -- In order to build statically with -fPIC, which isn't
> > the
> > >> case with the general distribution
> > >> 3) mkl-dnn -- In order to build and have debug information available
> for
> > >> mkl-dnn (and possibly submit bugfixes)
> > >>
> > >> What do you all think?
> > >>
> > >> -Chris
> > >>
> >
>

Re: 3rdparty packages as submodules

[Chris Olivier <cj...@gmail.com>]

I support putting gtest in 3rdparty as well. That being said, which of
these should we be storing in the Apache repository and which do we pull
from their source repositories. What’s standard practice in this case for
Apache projects?

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 5:54 PM Pedro Larroy <pe...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> We could also add gtest as well for example.
>
>
>
> I would like to point out that is quite cumbersome to get your code
> tested and ready before sending a PR, this includes installing
> cpplint, pylint, gtest…
>
> Installing gtest and bootstrapping it is not completely trivial.
>
>
>
> Kind regards.
>
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Eric Xie <jx...@apache.org> wrote:
> > I'm fine with a 3rdparty folder. Not sure about apache legal.
> >
> > On 2017-11-17 10:25, Chris Olivier <cj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> All,
> >>
> >> I often find it desirable to have a method for 3rdparty packages to be
> >> included (possibly optionally) in a 3rdparty directory.   We do this
> with
> >> 'cub' to some degree, but it's in the root and is actually a fork in the
> >> dmlc repository.  Some samples of what might go in there:
> >>
> >> 1) Intel OpenMP (llvm-openmp) -- In order to use Intel OMP by default
> >> 2) gperftools -- In order to build statically with -fPIC, which isn't
> the
> >> case with the general distribution
> >> 3) mkl-dnn -- In order to build and have debug information available for
> >> mkl-dnn (and possibly submit bugfixes)
> >>
> >> What do you all think?
> >>
> >> -Chris
> >>
>

Re: 3rdparty packages as submodules

[Pedro Larroy <pe...@gmail.com>]

We could also add gtest as well for example.



I would like to point out that is quite cumbersome to get your code
tested and ready before sending a PR, this includes installing
cpplint, pylint, gtest…

Installing gtest and bootstrapping it is not completely trivial.



Kind regards.

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Eric Xie <jx...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'm fine with a 3rdparty folder. Not sure about apache legal.
>
> On 2017-11-17 10:25, Chris Olivier <cj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> I often find it desirable to have a method for 3rdparty packages to be
>> included (possibly optionally) in a 3rdparty directory.   We do this with
>> 'cub' to some degree, but it's in the root and is actually a fork in the
>> dmlc repository.  Some samples of what might go in there:
>>
>> 1) Intel OpenMP (llvm-openmp) -- In order to use Intel OMP by default
>> 2) gperftools -- In order to build statically with -fPIC, which isn't the
>> case with the general distribution
>> 3) mkl-dnn -- In order to build and have debug information available for
>> mkl-dnn (and possibly submit bugfixes)
>>
>> What do you all think?
>>
>> -Chris
>>

Re: 3rdparty packages as submodules

[Eric Xie <jx...@apache.org>]

I'm fine with a 3rdparty folder. Not sure about apache legal.

On 2017-11-17 10:25, Chris Olivier <cj...@gmail.com> wrote: 
> All,
> 
> I often find it desirable to have a method for 3rdparty packages to be
> included (possibly optionally) in a 3rdparty directory.   We do this with
> 'cub' to some degree, but it's in the root and is actually a fork in the
> dmlc repository.  Some samples of what might go in there:
> 
> 1) Intel OpenMP (llvm-openmp) -- In order to use Intel OMP by default
> 2) gperftools -- In order to build statically with -fPIC, which isn't the
> case with the general distribution
> 3) mkl-dnn -- In order to build and have debug information available for
> mkl-dnn (and possibly submit bugfixes)
> 
> What do you all think?
> 
> -Chris
>