On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, Reid Spencer wrote:> As I'm not particularly active with LLVM right now, it doesn't make any > difference to me, personally. However, I am a strong advocate for "release > early, release often". We had previously agreed to releases 4 times per > year. This will be the 3rd and final one this year. Many users of LLVM only > work from release to release so it is unfair to them to let them stray very > far from the CVS "head" simply for lack of releases.Makes sense. Somehow I expected this response from everyone :)> I think the improvements made to the code base over the last few months have > been VERY significant, especially on the backend. I think the current work > on the new backend architecture should find a logical stopping point and then > the release put out after sufficient testing.Absolutely. How does this tentative plan sound: we have two more weeks of development, then start the release processing part on about Oct 31 (spooky!). If have some plans for things that I will do to wrap up some features in the code generator. It would be great if the cygwin people can figure out what needs to be done to make cygwin work as well as possible for the release (and when the actual release happens, making a binary cygwin distro would be great!). If someone wants to help start whipping documentation (updating them as needed) and release notes (finding the bugs fixed and major features in the release) into shape, it would be a great help for me, otherwise I'll dive in next week. -Chris -- http://nondot.org/sabre/ http://llvm.org/
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 12:04:38PM -0500, Chris Lattner wrote:> On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, Reid Spencer wrote: > >As I'm not particularly active with LLVM right now, it doesn't make > >any difference to me, personally. However, I am a strong advocate > >for "release early, release often". We had previously agreed to > >releases 4 times per year. This will be the 3rd and final one this > >year. Many users of LLVM only work from release to release so it is > >unfair to them to let them stray very far from the CVS "head" simply > >for lack of releases. > > Makes sense. Somehow I expected this response from everyone :)Well, I already read a few people echo my sentiments, but since you expect this from _everyone_, let me second what Reid and Andrew Lenharth have said. :)> How does this tentative plan sound: we have two more weeks of > development, then start the release processing part on about Oct 31 > (spooky!).In that case, it needs a cool "release name". :) -- Misha Brukman :: http://misha.brukman.net :: http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005, Misha Brukman wrote:>> How does this tentative plan sound: we have two more weeks of >> development, then start the release processing part on about Oct 31 >> (spooky!). > > In that case, it needs a cool "release name". :)Suggestions welcome! -Chris -- http://nondot.org/sabre/ http://llvm.org/