Michał Górny via llvm-dev
2021-Jun-02 09:40 UTC
[llvm-dev] [Release-testers] 12.0.1-rc1 release has been tagged
On Tue, 2021-06-01 at 10:03 -0700, Tom Stellard wrote:> On 5/28/21 1:45 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Wed, 2021-05-26 at 00:15 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers > > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I've tagged the 12.0.1-rc1 release. Testers may upload binaries and report results. > > > > > > > I've started testing, hit two bugs I've already reported for 12.0.0 RCs > > and figured out I'm wasting my time. It seems that LLVM reached > > the point where releases are pushed through just for the sake of > > releases and QA doesn't exist. > > > > Which bugs are these? >The three I've hit immediately are: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48918 https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48937 https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48939 Just to be clear, I'm not blaming you. But the whole release testing process is just getting more and more frustrating. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
Andrew Kelley via llvm-dev
2021-Jun-03 19:23 UTC
[llvm-dev] [Release-testers] 12.0.1-rc1 release has been tagged
On 6/2/21 2:40 AM, Michał Górny via llvm-dev wrote:> On Tue, 2021-06-01 at 10:03 -0700, Tom Stellard wrote: >> On 5/28/21 1:45 PM, Michał Górny wrote: >>> On Wed, 2021-05-26 at 00:15 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers >>> wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I've tagged the 12.0.1-rc1 release. Testers may upload binaries and report results. >>>> >>> >>> I've started testing, hit two bugs I've already reported for 12.0.0 RCs >>> and figured out I'm wasting my time. It seems that LLVM reached >>> the point where releases are pushed through just for the sake of >>> releases and QA doesn't exist. >>> >> >> Which bugs are these?https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49821 The fix for this has been in main branch since May 4, with a request to merge into release/12.x, and yet the release candidate does not include this, despite the bug open as a 12.0.1 release blocker. Downstream we have our MIPS test suite disabled because of this bug. It was passing with LLVM 11.> > Just to be clear, I'm not blaming you. But the whole release testing > process is just getting more and more frustrating. >I'm pretty frustrated over here too. What's the hurry on tagging releases? Can't we wait to tag releases until all the release blockers are fixed? This is a compiler backend. Priority number one should be not introducing regressions. The timing of releases is not important at all in comparison. Andrew -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: OpenPGP_signature Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 840 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20210603/7d5c7152/attachment.sig>
Tom Stellard via llvm-dev
2021-Jun-04 23:31 UTC
[llvm-dev] [Release-testers] 12.0.1-rc1 release has been tagged
On 6/2/21 2:40 AM, Michał Górny wrote:> On Tue, 2021-06-01 at 10:03 -0700, Tom Stellard wrote: >> On 5/28/21 1:45 PM, Michał Górny wrote: >>> On Wed, 2021-05-26 at 00:15 -0700, Tom Stellard via Release-testers >>> wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I've tagged the 12.0.1-rc1 release. Testers may upload binaries and report results. >>>> >>> >>> I've started testing, hit two bugs I've already reported for 12.0.0 RCs >>> and figured out I'm wasting my time. It seems that LLVM reached >>> the point where releases are pushed through just for the sake of >>> releases and QA doesn't exist. >>> >> >> Which bugs are these? >> > > The three I've hit immediately are: > > https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48918 > https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48937 > https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48939 > > Just to be clear, I'm not blaming you. But the whole release testing > process is just getting more and more frustrating. >If you have suggestion for improvements, I would be interested in hearing those. The main problem that I see is that there needs to be a developer interested in fixing a bug for it to get fixed. We (as a community) can do more to help make developers aware of bugs (I'm hoping that moving to GitHub issues will make this easier), but I don't know of a good way to incentive developers to work on specific issues when it doesn't fit into their normal day-to-day responsibilities. -Tom