On 02/19/2015 04:28 PM, Renato Golin wrote:> On 19 February 2015 at 19:58, Tom Honermann <thonermann at coverity.com> wrote: >> The effort isn't always so small for us however. It has generally taken us >> about a month to upgrade and vet a new Clang release. The Clang release >> cadence is faster than ours, so timing isn't always great (not a complaint, >> just a reality). > > That's why most developers keep in sync with ToT. It hurts a lot less > than yearly migrations, even if you only release your software once a > year. And you can still rely on release tests as a point-in-time of > stability.It hurts less at one time, yes. But syncing often is actually more costly due to overhead involved with each sync, at least for us. We aren't in a position to just merge ToT, try a build, and see what happens due to various automated build required integration processes. Not your concern though :) Tom.
On 19 February 2015 at 21:37, Tom Honermann <thonermann at coverity.com> wrote:> It hurts less at one time, yes. But syncing often is actually more costly > due to overhead involved with each sync, at least for us. We aren't in a > position to just merge ToT, try a build, and see what happens due to various > automated build required integration processes. Not your concern though :)Makes sense. Build systems are always more complex than what they build... :) cheers, --renato
David Chisnall
2015-Feb-20 08:31 UTC
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] [3.6 Release] RC3 has been tagged
On 19 Feb 2015, at 21:37, Tom Honermann <thonermann at coverity.com> wrote:> > It hurts less at one time, yes. But syncing often is actually more costly due to overhead involved with each sync, at least for us.I've found the same thing over the last couple of years. There's enough API churn going on in head that regular syncs often mean migrating the same bit of code to new APIs several times over the course of a release. I used to do regular merges from ToT for out of tree projects, now I only do that for our back end (where we actually need ToT features periodically). For everything else, I just accept the pain of updating once every release or two (or, in a couple of cases, just let the project bitrot). David
On 20 February 2015 at 08:31, David Chisnall <David.Chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:> I used to do regular merges from ToT for out of tree projects, now I only do that for our back end (where we actually need ToT features periodically). For everything else, I just accept the pain of updating once every release or two (or, in a couple of cases, just let the project bitrot).Do you guys find enough information on the release notes about the API changes to ease your migration? cheers, --renato
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 2:31 AM, David Chisnall <David.Chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:> I used to do regular merges from ToT for out of tree projects, now I only do that for our back end (where we actually need ToT features periodically). > For everything else, I just accept the pain of updating once every release or two (or, in a couple of cases, just let the project bitrot).You don't hit problems where all the components need to be in version sync (e.g. clang, llvm, compiler-rt, etc...) ? -- # Meador