llvm dev - Oct 2021 - Proposal: introduce dependency on abseil when building benchmarks

On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 8:56 AM Renato Golin <rengolin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Oct 2021 at 16:46, Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com>
wrote:
>
>> What would be the preferred duration?
>>
>
> It's not at all about duration, it's about making sure the right
people
> have looked at the proposal and agreed with the plan.
>
> Unless people that actually build and run benchmarks have agreed with your
> proposal, you should not merge a clear breaking change.
>
One of the goals of this thread was identifying who those folks may be.

>
> Of course, you can always merge, and break people's stuff, and revert,
and
> then discuss, but I'd strongly encourage you not to do that, as it
isn't
> nice to other people.
>
> You should ask around, who are the people who build benchmarks. Check with
> the target owners, buildbot owners, past threads on benchmarking, and make
> sure they're all included in the discussion.
>
Yup, that's the purpose of this thread.

> It's really easy to miss an email like this and it's just out of
luck that
> I didn't.
>
Is there a more appropriate channel of communication where owners could be
identified?

>
> For now, given the extremely limited platform support abseil provides,
> even considering the best effort part, I'd strongly discourage you to
merge.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20211007/32d2248d/attachment.html>

On Thu, 7 Oct 2021 at 17:01, Mircea Trofin <mtrofin at google.com> wrote:
> Unless people that actually build and run benchmarks have agreed with your
>> proposal, you should not merge a clear breaking change.
>>
> One of the goals of this thread was identifying who those folks may be.
>
And yet, you propose to follow through if no one objected. Which is never a
good idea for breaking changes.

It's really easy to miss an email like this and it's just out of luck
that
>> I didn't.
>>
> Is there a more appropriate channel of communication where owners could be
> identified?
>
No, this is the right place.

But you either wait for people to find this thread (however long it takes),
or you actively search for them (as I outlined before) and include them in
the conversation, for example, CC'ing them in the thread.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20211007/701254a2/attachment.html>