-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 448
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
feat: Add 2020 roadmap #1121
feat: Add 2020 roadmap #1121
Conversation
/assign @johnugeorge @andreyvelich |
/lgtm |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@gaocegege Thank you for the PR. I added few things.
ROADMAP.md
Outdated
* Enhance release process; adding automation (see https://bit.ly/2F7o4gM) | ||
- Delete Suggestion deployment after Experiment is finished [#1061](https://github.com/kubeflow/katib/issues/1061) | ||
- Save Suggestion state after deployment is deleted [#1062](https://github.com/kubeflow/katib/issues/1062) | ||
- Reconsider the design of Trial Template [#906](https://github.com/kubeflow/katib/issues/906) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe also add: Change design of NAS Model Constructor?
As you know, we have model constructor inside Training Container. I think it is not very useful for the user.
If we can construct model somewhere else (Suggestion or Init Container) and send, for example, json representation of the model directly to the training container, user doesn't need to include this part to the training container.
I will create an issue about it soon.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM. Looking forward to your issue.
Also, I found that we have something in TODO for the current NAS RL suggestion: https://github.com/kubeflow/katib/tree/master/pkg/suggestion/v1alpha3/NAS_Reinforcement_Learning#to-do. What do you think, should we add something to the ROADMAP? |
@andreyvelich: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: gaocegege. Note that only kubeflow members and repo collaborators can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
Signed-off-by: Ce Gao <gaoce@caicloud.io>
@andreyvelich Do we have the bandwidth for the TODO in ENAS? I think we can add it but in low priority. WDYT |
Signed-off-by: Ce Gao <gaoce@caicloud.io>
Signed-off-by: Ce Gao <gaoce@caicloud.io>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Comments are addressed, PTAL
/assign @andreyvelich
/lgtm |
Fixes: #1104 |
/approve |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: johnugeorge 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 |
@gaocegege Thank you for the changes! |
* feat: Add 2020 roadmap Signed-off-by: Ce Gao <gaoce@caicloud.io> * fix: Address comments in kubeflow#1121 Signed-off-by: Ce Gao <gaoce@caicloud.io> * fix: Address comments Signed-off-by: Ce Gao <gaoce@caicloud.io>
Signed-off-by: Ce Gao gaoce@caicloud.io
What this PR does / why we need it:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)
format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Release note: