> On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Aaron Gray wrote: >>> What is the motivation for this? The Win32 directory doesn't have >>> VS2003 >>> source code AFAIK, >> >> No just the VS2003 project and solution files and a about 30 sub >> directories >> which are not required on *nix platforms. So it would be good to have the >> "win32" files in a separate repository if possible. I thought this would >> be >> a convient time to do this. > > We also have xcode projects. If you don't want to check them out and > update them, with svn, you can use 'svn switch' on those directories.Okay. Still think a separate repository would be a good idea. A bit of work to implement but would be a good idea as every *nix user has to implement a 'svn switch' putting the onus on them rather than on the Windows user.>> I would like a VS2005 release of LLVM as well as the VS2003 for >> completeness, as VS2003 is really old hat now. > > VS2005 will upgrade the project file.I realize that but VS2003 is really old now and it would be good to support VS2005 properly for LLVM 2.0. Aaron
On Sat, 2007-03-03 at 16:44 -0800, Chris Lattner wrote:> On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Aaron Gray wrote: > >> We also have xcode projects. If you don't want to check them out and > >> update them, with svn, you can use 'svn switch' on those directories. > > > > Okay. Still think a separate repository would be a good idea. A bit of work > > to implement but would be a good idea as every *nix user has to implement a > > 'svn switch' putting the onus on them rather than on the Windows user. > > I think you are mistakenly assuming that we aim to serve UNIX users at the > expense of win32 users. Why make life harder for people on win32? > Perhaps we should move all the unix makefiles to a separate repo?I too am against this split. The "llvm" repository should contain all that is necessary to build llvm on any platform and supporting whatever build environments are necessary. If someone wanted to add a "borland" directory, I wouldn't be opposed. About the only reason to remove these directories is if they got so stale as to be unusable. But even in that case, we wouldn't move them to a new repository, just delete (or replace) them. Reid.> > -Chris >
On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Aaron Gray wrote:>> We also have xcode projects. If you don't want to check them out and >> update them, with svn, you can use 'svn switch' on those directories. > > Okay. Still think a separate repository would be a good idea. A bit of work > to implement but would be a good idea as every *nix user has to implement a > 'svn switch' putting the onus on them rather than on the Windows user.I think you are mistakenly assuming that we aim to serve UNIX users at the expense of win32 users. Why make life harder for people on win32? Perhaps we should move all the unix makefiles to a separate repo? -Chris -- http://nondot.org/sabre/ http://llvm.org/
Chris wrote:> On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Aaron Gray wrote: > > Okay. Still think a separate repository would be a good idea. A bit > > of work to implement but would be a good idea as every *nix user has > > to implement a 'svn switch' putting the onus on them rather than on > > the Windows user. > > I think you are mistakenly assuming that we aim to serve UNIX users at > the expense of win32 users. Why make life harder for people on win32? > Perhaps we should move all the unix makefiles to a separate repo?Besides, even a "nothing but Unix" developer should have the win32 source as part of their tree so `grep -r', etc., takes it into account when planning changes. Cheers, Ralph.