Chris, On Oct 15, 2009, at 8:45 AM, Chris Lattner wrote:> Unfortunately, we found out at the last minute that Apple has a rule > which prevents its engineers from giving video taped talks or > distributing slides. We will hold onto the video and slide assets in > case this rule changes in the future.While I'm glad to know we all share similar sentiments on this, lots of "me too" emails on this list don't seem likely to change anything. Is there anyone we can email to express our displeasure at this decision, so that we might have some vague chance of having an impact? --Owen -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 2620 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20091017/1d1343a9/attachment.bin>
On Oct 17, 2009, at 1:32 AM, Owen Anderson wrote:> Chris, > > On Oct 15, 2009, at 8:45 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: >> Unfortunately, we found out at the last minute that Apple has a rule >> which prevents its engineers from giving video taped talks or >> distributing slides. We will hold onto the video and slide assets in >> case this rule changes in the future. > > > While I'm glad to know we all share similar sentiments on this, lots > of "me too" emails on this list don't seem likely to change > anything. Is there anyone we can email to express our displeasure > at this decision, so that we might have some vague chance of having > an impact?The people enforcing this policy are applying a blanket policy to a situation which (IMO) makes no sense. I forward every "disgruntled" email on to the people in question. Since they are the defenders of "Apple's public image", it seems fairly possible that it may eventually sway them. The more public the griping, the better. So yes, 'me too' emails are potentially useful. -Chris
On Oct 17, 2009, at 1:28 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:> On Oct 17, 2009, at 1:32 AM, Owen Anderson wrote: >> Chris, >> >> On Oct 15, 2009, at 8:45 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: >>> Unfortunately, we found out at the last minute that Apple has a rule >>> which prevents its engineers from giving video taped talks or >>> distributing slides. We will hold onto the video and slide assets >>> in >>> case this rule changes in the future. >> >> >> While I'm glad to know we all share similar sentiments on this, lots >> of "me too" emails on this list don't seem likely to change >> anything. Is there anyone we can email to express our displeasure >> at this decision, so that we might have some vague chance of having >> an impact? > > The people enforcing this policy are applying a blanket policy to a > situation which (IMO) makes no sense. I forward every "disgruntled" > email on to the people in question. Since they are the defenders of > "Apple's public image", it seems fairly possible that it may > eventually sway them. The more public the griping, the better. > > So yes, 'me too' emails are potentially useful. > > -ChrisA definite "me too" here. I went to the exception handling BoF instead of the OpenCL talk, expecting it to be online after. -- Joe Ranieri
On 2009-10-17 20:28, Chris Lattner wrote:> On Oct 17, 2009, at 1:32 AM, Owen Anderson wrote: > >> Chris, >> >> On Oct 15, 2009, at 8:45 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: >> >>> Unfortunately, we found out at the last minute that Apple has a rule >>> which prevents its engineers from giving video taped talks or >>> distributing slides. We will hold onto the video and slide assets in >>> case this rule changes in the future. >>> >> While I'm glad to know we all share similar sentiments on this, lots >> of "me too" emails on this list don't seem likely to change >> anything. Is there anyone we can email to express our displeasure >> at this decision, so that we might have some vague chance of having >> an impact? >> > > The people enforcing this policy are applying a blanket policy to a > situation which (IMO) makes no sense. I forward every "disgruntled" > email on to the people in question. Since they are the defenders of > "Apple's public image", it seems fairly possible that it may > eventually sway them. The more public the griping, the better. > > So yes, 'me too' emails are potentially useful. >I would be especially interested in the Scalar Evolution, and Register Allocation talks (and I wouldn't mind seeing the other Apple talks either, for example OpenCL is not something of immediate interest to me, but perhaps something in the talk could prove interesting/useful). I think having the talks available is a great way to show Apple's accomplishments and involvement in LLVM. I don't know what the reason is behind Apple's policy, there's certainly nothing to be ashamed about regarding these talks, and they don't discuss the secret internal workings of an Apple product: the code for everything that is discussed is publicly available AFAIK. Either way the people who attended the meeting were able to see and hear everything, not making the talks available to others only results in disappointment. Maybe Apple's marketing dept. could approve each video/slide on a case by case basis? Best regards, --Edwin
> The people enforcing this policy are applying a blanket policy to a > situation which (IMO) makes no sense. I forward every "disgruntled" > email on to the people in question. Since they are the defenders of > "Apple's public image", it seems fairly possible that it may > eventually sway them. The more public the griping, the better. > > So yes, 'me too' emails are potentially useful.Well, if Chris says so, then "me too!" I'm a student at MIT and I would've loved to go see those talks, but I was too busy to get back to the left coast. When I talk to my friends about what I worked on over the summer, I talk about LLVM, and now I have to mention this little addendum that working with LLVM can be troublesome because of Apple's secrecy. This is a case in point. ditto-ly, Reid
Hello LLVM Developers, Here's a definite "me too" letter also. My programming partner and I were planning on coming together in the same car for a 3 day drive there and another 3 day drive back... except that his wife gave birth about 2 or 3 weeks before the conference and he had to stay with her. SInce I couldn't afford the gas for the trip myself that meant I couldn't come either. I know that several flavors of BSD have made Clang their default compiler and at least one Linux distro in the works is planning on doing likewise. Clang is one of the hottest cross-platform projects that open-source has to offer in the sense that it offers a plausible alternative to the GCC toolchain. The possibility of a cross-compiling to a generic bitcode makes it even more valuable since it greatly simplifies the GCC problem of having to have a separate version of GCC or even LLVM-GCC for each platform being compiled for. Maybe it would be more practical in future conferences for the Apple engineers to pass crib notes to the non-Apple people involved with the projects and just have non-Apple speakers from now on. This should get around the rule. I just hope we don't have to sign non-disclosure agreements upon arrival like some developers' conferences I've been to. Perhaps next year I can come, --Sam Crow ----- Original Message ----> From: Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> > To: Owen Anderson <resistor at mac.com> > Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Sat, October 17, 2009 12:28:36 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] Developer meeting videos up > > On Oct 17, 2009, at 1:32 AM, Owen Anderson wrote: > > Chris, > > > > On Oct 15, 2009, at 8:45 AM, Chris Lattner wrote: > >> Unfortunately, we found out at the last minute that Apple has a rule > >> which prevents its engineers from giving video taped talks or > >> distributing slides. We will hold onto the video and slide assets in > >> case this rule changes in the future. > > > > > > While I'm glad to know we all share similar sentiments on this, lots > > of "me too" emails on this list don't seem likely to change > > anything. Is there anyone we can email to express our displeasure > > at this decision, so that we might have some vague chance of having > > an impact? > > The people enforcing this policy are applying a blanket policy to a > situation which (IMO) makes no sense. I forward every "disgruntled" > email on to the people in question. Since they are the defenders of > "Apple's public image", it seems fairly possible that it may > eventually sway them. The more public the griping, the better. > > So yes, 'me too' emails are potentially useful. > > -Chris