Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

RHOAIENG-9741: Add Tensorflow/PyTorch version compatibility files #618

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 17, 2024

Conversation

caponetto
Copy link
Contributor

@caponetto caponetto commented Jul 12, 2024

https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHOAIENG-9741

Description

Adding version compatibility files for TensorFlow and PyTorch. Values for TensorFlow were extracted from here via script. Values for PyTorch were manually extracted from here and here. The idea is to refer to these files during the release automation, and also keep them up to date whenever a new release is out.

Note: TensorFlow 2.17.0 was released yesterday. I'll add this new release to the file as soon as the information is consolidated.

How Has This Been Tested?

Merge criteria:

  • The commits are squashed in a cohesive manner and have meaningful messages.
  • Testing instructions have been added in the PR body (for PRs involving changes that are not immediately obvious).
  • The developer has manually tested the changes and verified that the changes work

@jiridanek
Copy link
Member

Values for TensorFlow were extracted from here via script.

Maybe add the script into the repository under scripts/ and the commentary on the PR into the README.md?

@caponetto
Copy link
Contributor Author

Values for TensorFlow were extracted from here via script.

Maybe add the script into the repository under scripts/ and the commentary on the PR into the README.md?

TBH I don't see much value in adding a simple script that parses a markdown table. New manual entries will be added to the files for the upcoming versions anyway.

@atheo89
Copy link
Member

atheo89 commented Jul 17, 2024

/lgtm

I would like to have a comment somehow inside .json files in order to point the places that we scrape this info.
However, I know that json doesn't support comments! So maybe we could mention it on readme or in the Wiki

@caponetto
Copy link
Contributor Author

caponetto commented Jul 17, 2024

/lgtm

I would like to have a comment somehow inside .json files in order to point the places that we scrape this info. However, I know that json doesn't support comments! So maybe we could mention it on readme or in the Wiki

@atheo89 I agree! We will have a dedicated wiki page for the release once the automation is in place, so I would add this information on this page later. WDYT?

@jiridanek
Copy link
Member

/lgtm, and I'm in favor of readme; wikis go stale even faster than readmes

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jul 17, 2024

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

@jiridanek
Copy link
Member

/lgtm /lgtm /lgtm

@atheo89
Copy link
Member

atheo89 commented Jul 17, 2024

dedicated wiki page for the release

Sounds great!

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jul 17, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

Approval requirements bypassed by manually added approval.

This pull-request has been approved by:

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@atheo89 atheo89 added the lgtm label Jul 17, 2024
@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit 821a004 into opendatahub-io:main Jul 17, 2024
6 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants