[LLVMdev] Open Source Contributions (was Re: Benchmarks)

Vladimir Prus
Wed, 05 May 2004 01:17:02 -0000

Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Wed, 5 May 2004, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> > > Take 'arch' for example: its approach seems like it would
solve almost
> > > all of the version control issues that we are facing, and
supports
> > > decentralized development in particular.  From what I understand,
you
> > > would be able to do all of your development on your own
"local" branch,
> > > others could have access to it, and when it's ready, we could
pull it
> > > in as one big patch or set of changes.
> >
> > There are a couple of problems. First, arch is not portable to
Windows.
> > Are you really sure nobody will port ALVA (or parts of it) to that
> > platform?
>
> Arch was just one example.  :)  I'm not familiar with Alva, what is it
> (google isn't particularly helpful)?

Actually, that's ALVA is what my spellchecker made from LLVM :-(. I meant:
if
LLVM is ported to Windows, then arch will become a problem.

> > Second, local repository is fine, but what if two persons ever decide
to
> > work on the same branch?
>
> I believe that arch allows you to do this kind of thing:
> http://www.gnu.org/software/gnu-arch/tutorial/shared-and-public-archives.ht
>ml#Shared_and_Public_Archives

Right, but you'd need HTTP/FTP server. Not a problem for *me*, but lots of
folks are behind firewalls and can't do that.

> ... but again, I haven't really spent the time to look into revision
> control systems in any detail.

Ok.

- Volodya