Rafael Espíndola via llvm-dev
2016-Jun-13 17:02 UTC
[llvm-dev] [3.9 Release] Release plan and call for testers
> I don't know that the actual policy has ever been formally documented, > although it has been discussed from time to time, so it's not too > surprising that people have different ideas of what the policy is. > > Maybe documenting the release-numbering-semantics policy alongside > the release-timing policy would be a good idea?It is documented at http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#ir-backwards-compatibility Cheers, Rafael
Renato Golin via llvm-dev
2016-Jun-13 17:22 UTC
[llvm-dev] [lldb-dev] [3.9 Release] Release plan and call for testers
On 13 June 2016 at 18:02, Rafael Espíndola <lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> It is documented at > > http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#ir-backwards-compatibilityThis is weird... "The bitcode format produced by a X.Y release will be readable by all following X.Z releases and the (X+1).0 release." Why (x+1).0 ? --renato
Michael Kuperstein via llvm-dev
2016-Jun-13 17:30 UTC
[llvm-dev] [lldb-dev] [3.9 Release] Release plan and call for testers
It would probably better for whoever wrote this text to pipe in, but I think the idea is that (X+1).0 is supposed to be a kind of a "bridge" release. That is, if you have legacy IR files that contain dropped features, or if the IR format changed significantly, you can still use the (X+1).0 auto-upgrade (which may be fairly complex) to read them, but this auto-upgrade complexity may be dropped in (X+1).1. I'm not completely sure this makes sense, but this is how I've always understood it. On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Renato Golin via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> On 13 June 2016 at 18:02, Rafael Espíndola <lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> > wrote: > > It is documented at > > > > http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#ir-backwards-compatibility > > This is weird... > > "The bitcode format produced by a X.Y release will be readable by all > following X.Z releases and the (X+1).0 release." > > Why (x+1).0 ? > > --renato > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160613/0ee8fd34/attachment.html>