Johannes Doerfert via llvm-dev
2020-May-12 21:55 UTC
[llvm-dev] RFC: Deleting git-svn folder (git-llvm, git-svnrevert, git-svnup)
TBH, all I initially asked for, still ask for, is a reason why `git llvm` was being removed. Your email was the only one that hinted on a reason. (more below) On 5/12/20 4:00 PM, David Blaikie wrote: > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 1:50 PM Johannes Doerfert via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> @Zola, Eric, >> >> >> I really feel the communication and reasoning here is problematic. >> >> From my perspective, you removed stuff "we don't need", ignoring whether >> it is used, and then let people figure out how to deal with the result. >> >> What I most dislike about the process most is how questions and concerns >> are then ignored or played down. >> > Honestly, I think Zola did more than I'd have expected to be done for this > - sending out the proposal (to llvm-dev, not just llvm-commits, even) & > waiting a week for feedback. Sure. That is why I did not mention the process that lead to the situation. I think my email/questions are well in line with post-commit review standards but people seem to disagree. > Suggesting that LLVM developers (the, apparently rather small (based on > feedback from before/after this change) number of them) migrate to the > standard git functionality for contributing to git projects seems like it's > in line with discussions I recall seeing before and after the git migration > - that the git-llvm scripts were migration tools (there was some discussion > about whether they might be used for more post-migration, to enforce > certain constraints, etc - but those ideas were not accepted/moved forward > with). I recall no decision being made back in October 2019 and that we will see how it goes. Till now I thought it went fine, or at least I haven't understood what needed fixing. > I have some concern about adding these scripts back in as they may lead to > greater divergence in developer experience and/or become less relevant over > time and a weird thing for newcomers to stumble over, perhaps. But I don't > feel /that/ strongly, if other folks particularly prefer using them, they > seem mostly harmless. I don't think I understand your concerns. Could you elaborate what divergence you can see in the future? FWIW, if the scripts are broken and people stumble over them it means no one takes care of them and removal is adequate. Thanks, Johannes > - Dave > >> >> Thanks, >> >> Johannes >> >> >> >> On 5/12/20 2:10 PM, Keane, Erich via llvm-dev wrote: >> >> FWIW, if you do your development in git-branches, it is a little more than that. IT ends up being: >> >> git push origin HEAD:master. >> >> Which is somewhat easy to mess up. For example, I inverted the HEAD/master at one point and ended up creating a branch named “HEAD” at one point. >> >> From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Eric Christopher via llvm-dev >> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 11:59 AM >> To: Hiroshi Yamauchi <yamauchi at google.com> <yamauchi at google.com> >> Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: Deleting git-svn folder (git-llvm, git-svnrevert, git-svnup) >> >> Just push :) >> >> On Tue, May 12, 2020, 8:46 AM Hiroshi Yamauchi <yamauchi at google.com<mailto:yamauchi at google.com> <yamauchi at google.com>> wrote: >> I was also using "git llvm push" to commit, sort of out of habit. What's a recommended, alternative way to push? >> >> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 11:57 AM Johannes Doerfert via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> I was actually using `git llvm` in my daily workflow. >> >> Could you explain why we want people to move away from that script? >> >> In addition to the convenience, it prevented me from accidentally creating a new branch (which I did before with push once). >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Johannes >> >> >> >> >> On 5/11/20 11:43 AM, Zola Bridges via llvm-dev wrote: >> >> Deleted this morning. Thanks! >> >> Zola Bridges >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 2:35 PM Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> <echristo at gmail.com><mailto:echristo at gmail.com> <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> Giving at least one explicit: >> >> >> >> Sounds good to me. >> >> >> >> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:01 PM Zola Bridges via llvm-dev < >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> >> >> Here is a link to the patch: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79348 >> >> >> >> Zola Bridges >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 11:50 AM Zola Bridges <zbrid at google.com> <zbrid at google.com><mailto:zbrid at google.com> <zbrid at google.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> >> >> I would like to delete this folder of svn to git migration tools. >> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/tree/master/llvm/utils/git-svn >> >> >> >> My understanding of these tools is that they were useful for when we >> >> were migrating between Git and SVN, but now, since the migration is >> >> complete, they can be deleted as they are either unnecessary or there are >> >> other more common workflow options (ie git llvm push --> git push). >> >> >> >> - Is there any reason these scripts should continue to exist that >> >> I'm not aware of? >> >> - I'd like to delete these next Monday. Is that timeline >> >> unacceptable to anyone? >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Zola Bridges >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing listllvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing listllvm-dev at lists.llvm.orghttps://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> >
David Blaikie via llvm-dev
2020-May-12 22:13 UTC
[llvm-dev] RFC: Deleting git-svn folder (git-llvm, git-svnrevert, git-svnup)
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 2:56 PM Johannes Doerfert < johannesdoerfert at gmail.com> wrote:> > TBH, all I initially asked for, still ask for, is a reason why `git > llvm` was being removed.Fair enough - and 24 hours later no one had replied to your inquiry - I don't think that's a huge deal, to be honest - I've certainly had to follow-up with higher email latencies than that pretty regularly. Eric had replied to someone else's question pretty reasonably "what do I use instead?" "git push" (what most people have been using since the transition)> Your email was the only one that hinted on a > reason. >I think the original proposal & response covered that - they seem(ed) like dead code ("My understanding of these tools is that they were useful for when we were migrating between Git and SVN, but now, since the migration is complete, they can be deleted as they are either unnecessary or there are other more common workflow options (ie git llvm push --> git push).") - some folks agreed, and time was given in case anyone had use cases they wanted to bring up & didn't.> > (more below) > > On 5/12/20 4:00 PM, David Blaikie wrote: > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 1:50 PM Johannes Doerfert via llvm-dev < > > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > >> @Zola, Eric, > >> > >> > >> I really feel the communication and reasoning here is problematic. > >> > >> From my perspective, you removed stuff "we don't need", ignoring > whether > >> it is used, and then let people figure out how to deal with the result. > >> > >> What I most dislike about the process most is how questions and > concerns > >> are then ignored or played down. > >> > > Honestly, I think Zola did more than I'd have expected to be done for > this > > - sending out the proposal (to llvm-dev, not just llvm-commits, even) & > > waiting a week for feedback. > > Sure. That is why I did not mention the process that lead to the situation. > I think my email/questions are well in line with post-commit review > standards but people seem to disagree. >I don't think your first email was unreasonable/not sure anyone's saying it was unreasonable?> > Suggesting that LLVM developers (the, apparently rather small (based on > > feedback from before/after this change) number of them) migrate to the > > standard git functionality for contributing to git projects seems > like it's > > in line with discussions I recall seeing before and after the git > migration > > - that the git-llvm scripts were migration tools (there was some > discussion > > about whether they might be used for more post-migration, to enforce > > certain constraints, etc - but those ideas were not accepted/moved > forward > > with). > > I recall no decision being made back in October 2019 and that we will > see how it goes. Till now I thought it went fine, or at least I haven't > understood what needed fixing. >I think the migration went fine, yes - but these scripts seem to me like a vestige of the hybrid situation & no longer needed/especially beneficial.> > I have some concern about adding these scripts back in as they may > lead to > > greater divergence in developer experience and/or become less > relevant over > > time and a weird thing for newcomers to stumble over, perhaps. But I > don't > > feel /that/ strongly, if other folks particularly prefer using them, > they > > seem mostly harmless. > > I don't think I understand your concerns. Could you elaborate what > divergence you can see in the future? FWIW, if the scripts are broken > and people stumble over them it means no one takes care of them and > removal is adequate. >I'd generally prefer to remove things sooner rather than later, personally. I believe some of the original motivation was an offline discussion about adding more features (to trim unnecessary Phabricator fields, I believe) to them & a response was that they're not really used/encouraged & so adding features wouldn't be especially valuable - so the thought was to go the other way, rather than keeping them around, and building processes that might only work with the scripts & then being let down when those processes aren't adhered to by most of the community (because they're not using the scripts) it'd be better to remove them and standardize practices on the plain git tools. - Dave> > > Thanks, > Johannes > > > > - Dave > > > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Johannes > >> > >> > >> > >> On 5/12/20 2:10 PM, Keane, Erich via llvm-dev wrote: > >> > >> FWIW, if you do your development in git-branches, it is a little > more than that. IT ends up being: > >> > >> git push origin HEAD:master. > >> > >> Which is somewhat easy to mess up. For example, I inverted the > HEAD/master at one point and ended up creating a branch named “HEAD” at > one point. > >> > >> From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> > <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Eric Christopher via > llvm-dev > >> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 11:59 AM > >> To: Hiroshi Yamauchi <yamauchi at google.com> <yamauchi at google.com> > >> Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > >> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: Deleting git-svn folder (git-llvm, > git-svnrevert, git-svnup) > >> > >> Just push :) > >> > >> On Tue, May 12, 2020, 8:46 AM Hiroshi Yamauchi > <yamauchi at google.com<mailto:yamauchi at google.com> <yamauchi at google.com>> > wrote: > >> I was also using "git llvm push" to commit, sort of out of habit. > What's a recommended, alternative way to push? > >> > >> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 11:57 AM Johannes Doerfert via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > >> > >> I was actually using `git llvm` in my daily workflow. > >> > >> Could you explain why we want people to move away from that script? > >> > >> In addition to the convenience, it prevented me from accidentally > creating a new branch (which I did before with push once). > >> > >> > >> > >> Cheers, > >> > >> Johannes > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On 5/11/20 11:43 AM, Zola Bridges via llvm-dev wrote: > >> > >> Deleted this morning. Thanks! > >> > >> Zola Bridges > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 2:35 PM Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> > <echristo at gmail.com><mailto:echristo at gmail.com> <echristo at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> Giving at least one explicit: > >> > >> > >> > >> Sounds good to me. > >> > >> > >> > >> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:01 PM Zola Bridges via llvm-dev < > >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> Here is a link to the patch: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79348 > >> > >> > >> > >> Zola Bridges > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 11:50 AM Zola Bridges <zbrid at google.com> > <zbrid at google.com><mailto:zbrid at google.com> <zbrid at google.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> Hi everyone, > >> > >> > >> > >> I would like to delete this folder of svn to git migration tools. > >> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/tree/master/llvm/utils/git-svn > >> > >> > >> > >> My understanding of these tools is that they were useful for when we > >> > >> were migrating between Git and SVN, but now, since the migration is > >> > >> complete, they can be deleted as they are either unnecessary or > there are > >> > >> other more common workflow options (ie git llvm push --> git push). > >> > >> > >> > >> - Is there any reason these scripts should continue to exist that > >> > >> I'm not aware of? > >> > >> - I'd like to delete these next Monday. Is that timeline > >> > >> unacceptable to anyone? > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Zola Bridges > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> > >> LLVM Developers mailing list > >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> > >> LLVM Developers mailing list > >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev > >> _______________________________________________ > >> LLVM Developers mailing > listllvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> LLVM Developers mailing > listllvm-dev at lists.llvm.orghttps:// > lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> LLVM Developers mailing list > >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > >> https://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/20200512/b3a49f45/attachment.html>
Johannes Doerfert via llvm-dev
2020-May-12 22:23 UTC
[llvm-dev] RFC: Deleting git-svn folder (git-llvm, git-svnrevert, git-svnup)
For some reason this thread seems to be gone in a wrong direction. I'm sorry for that. The discussion on the RFC asked for a reason to keep the script, I think we heard reasons to do so (due to branches). Now, I was unable to determine if the `git llvm` scripts was removed "just as part of the bunch" or if we expect a problem with the script. If it is the former, are there reasons against adding it back? Thanks, Johannes On 5/12/20 5:13 PM, David Blaikie wrote:> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 2:56 PM Johannes Doerfert < > johannesdoerfert at gmail.com> wrote: > >> TBH, all I initially asked for, still ask for, is a reason why `git >> llvm` was being removed. > > Fair enough - and 24 hours later no one had replied to your inquiry - I > don't think that's a huge deal, to be honest - I've certainly had to > follow-up with higher email latencies than that pretty regularly. Eric had > replied to someone else's question pretty reasonably "what do I use > instead?" "git push" (what most people have been using since the transition) >> Your email was the only one that hinted on a >> reason. >> > I think the original proposal & response covered that - they seem(ed) like > dead code ("My understanding of these tools is that they were useful for > when we were migrating between Git and SVN, but now, since the migration is > complete, they can be deleted as they are either unnecessary or there are > other more common workflow options (ie git llvm push --> git push).") - > some folks agreed, and time was given in case anyone had use cases they > wanted to bring up & didn't. >>> (more below) >> >> On 5/12/20 4:00 PM, David Blaikie wrote: >> > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 1:50 PM Johannes Doerfert via llvm-dev < >> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> > >> >> @Zola, Eric, >> >> >> >> >> >> I really feel the communication and reasoning here is problematic. >> >> >> >> From my perspective, you removed stuff "we don't need", ignoring >> whether >> >> it is used, and then let people figure out how to deal with the result. >> >> >> >> What I most dislike about the process most is how questions and >> concerns >> >> are then ignored or played down. >> >> >> > Honestly, I think Zola did more than I'd have expected to be done for >> this >> > - sending out the proposal (to llvm-dev, not just llvm-commits, even) & >> > waiting a week for feedback. >> >> Sure. That is why I did not mention the process that lead to the situation. >> I think my email/questions are well in line with post-commit review >> standards but people seem to disagree. >> > I don't think your first email was unreasonable/not sure anyone's saying it > was unreasonable? > > >>> Suggesting that LLVM developers (the, apparently rather small (based on >> > feedback from before/after this change) number of them) migrate to the >> > standard git functionality for contributing to git projects seems >> like it's >> > in line with discussions I recall seeing before and after the git >> migration >> > - that the git-llvm scripts were migration tools (there was some >> discussion >> > about whether they might be used for more post-migration, to enforce >> > certain constraints, etc - but those ideas were not accepted/moved >> forward >> > with). >> >> I recall no decision being made back in October 2019 and that we will >> see how it goes. Till now I thought it went fine, or at least I haven't >> understood what needed fixing. >> > I think the migration went fine, yes - but these scripts seem to me like a > vestige of the hybrid situation & no longer needed/especially beneficial. > > >>> I have some concern about adding these scripts back in as they may >> lead to >> > greater divergence in developer experience and/or become less >> relevant over >> > time and a weird thing for newcomers to stumble over, perhaps. But I >> don't >> > feel /that/ strongly, if other folks particularly prefer using them, >> they >> > seem mostly harmless. >> >> I don't think I understand your concerns. Could you elaborate what >> divergence you can see in the future? FWIW, if the scripts are broken >> and people stumble over them it means no one takes care of them and >> removal is adequate. >> > I'd generally prefer to remove things sooner rather than later, personally. > I believe some of the original motivation was an offline discussion about > adding more features (to trim unnecessary Phabricator fields, I believe) to > them & a response was that they're not really used/encouraged & so adding > features wouldn't be especially valuable - so the thought was to go the > other way, rather than keeping them around, and building processes that > might only work with the scripts & then being let down when those processes > aren't adhered to by most of the community (because they're not using the > scripts) it'd be better to remove them and standardize practices on the > plain git tools. > > - Dave > > >> >> Thanks, >> Johannes >> >> >> > - Dave >> > >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> Johannes >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 5/12/20 2:10 PM, Keane, Erich via llvm-dev wrote: >> >> >> >> FWIW, if you do your development in git-branches, it is a little >> more than that. IT ends up being: >> >> >> >> git push origin HEAD:master. >> >> >> >> Which is somewhat easy to mess up. For example, I inverted the >> HEAD/master at one point and ended up creating a branch named “HEAD” at >> one point. >> >> >> >> From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> >> <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Eric Christopher via >> llvm-dev >> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 11:59 AM >> >> To: Hiroshi Yamauchi <yamauchi at google.com> <yamauchi at google.com> >> >> Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >> >> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: Deleting git-svn folder (git-llvm, >> git-svnrevert, git-svnup) >> >> >> >> Just push :) >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 12, 2020, 8:46 AM Hiroshi Yamauchi >> <yamauchi at google.com<mailto:yamauchi at google.com> <yamauchi at google.com>> >> wrote: >> >> I was also using "git llvm push" to commit, sort of out of habit. >> What's a recommended, alternative way to push? >> >> >> >> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 11:57 AM Johannes Doerfert via llvm-dev >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> >> >> I was actually using `git llvm` in my daily workflow. >> >> >> >> Could you explain why we want people to move away from that script? >> >> >> >> In addition to the convenience, it prevented me from accidentally >> creating a new branch (which I did before with push once). >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> >> Johannes >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 5/11/20 11:43 AM, Zola Bridges via llvm-dev wrote: >> >> >> >> Deleted this morning. Thanks! >> >> >> >> Zola Bridges >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 2:35 PM Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> >> <echristo at gmail.com><mailto:echristo at gmail.com> <echristo at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Giving at least one explicit: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Sounds good to me. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:01 PM Zola Bridges via llvm-dev < >> >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Here is a link to the patch: https://reviews.llvm.org/D79348 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Zola Bridges >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 11:50 AM Zola Bridges <zbrid at google.com> >> <zbrid at google.com><mailto:zbrid at google.com> <zbrid at google.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I would like to delete this folder of svn to git migration tools. >> >> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/tree/master/llvm/utils/git-svn >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> My understanding of these tools is that they were useful for when we >> >> >> >> were migrating between Git and SVN, but now, since the migration is >> >> >> >> complete, they can be deleted as they are either unnecessary or >> there are >> >> >> >> other more common workflow options (ie git llvm push --> git push). >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> - Is there any reason these scripts should continue to exist that >> >> >> >> I'm not aware of? >> >> >> >> - I'd like to delete these next Monday. Is that timeline >> >> >> >> unacceptable to anyone? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> Zola Bridges >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >> >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >> >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> LLVM Developers mailing >> listllvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> LLVM Developers mailing >> listllvm-dev at lists.llvm.orghttps:// >> lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org >> >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> >> >> > >> >>