[llvm-dev] [RFC] One or many git repositories?

Michael Gottesman via llvm-dev
2016-07-29T02:50:44Z

> On Jul 28, 2016, at 6:23 PM, Lang Hames via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> Aaaand I'm (mostly) caught up. Phew.
>
> FWIW Chris B is right: I had been put off commenting on this thread by the
length, and the number of git discussions that have come before this. He
convinced me to make the effort to put my 2 cents in though - thanks Chris.

I am also having issues attempting to follow this thread (it is huge and filled
with... distractions).

I would appreciate it if someone would put together a succint proposal that
strips out the rest of the thread (unless I have missed it). This would help to
center the discussion and involve more people in the discussion.

From a quick skim, it definitely seems like this whole proposal is about
optimizing for a specific use-case, producing a clang based toolchain. But I
really can not say without spending an hour or two reading the whole thread.

Thanks,
Michael

>
> So - for my use-case I don't have strong feelings one way or the other*
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpaQpyU_QiM>. That said, something about
the discussion so far strikes me as dissonant: If we're going to break out
some sub-projects (the test-suite for licensing reasons, the runtimes for
modularity) then it's not really a mono-repo any more. It's a multi-repo
where we've collapsed some (but not all) of the existing repos. To the
extent that we have to build tooling to support multiple-repos (auto-mergers for
test bots, command line utils for devs who want the main repo plus tests plus
...), could we re-use that to keep the existing modular project setup? This
might be a fairly low-benefit proposition if the tools we develop were only
usable by in-tree projects, but there are many other users of LLVM (Swift leaps
to mind since I'm at Apple, but there are many others) who might appreciate
the ability to use LLVM-provided tools to pick-and-mix LLVM projects into their
repos. Otherwise, every downstream user will have to roll some version of these
tools themselves.
>
> - Lang.
>
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Renato Golin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
> On 28 July 2016 at 22:12, Chris Bieneman <beanz at apple.com
<mailto:beanz at apple.com>> wrote:
> > It is worth pointing out the Jenkins job that runs that is a
playground I setup for myself. It is nowhere near production ready, and it will
fail frequently as I iterate messing around with it.
>
> Sure, I think that's implied.
>
> cheers,
> --renato
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
<http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160728/be1f010a/attachment-0001.html>