llvm dev - Jul 2020 - RFC: Adding a staging branch (temporarily) to facilitate upstreaming

> On 2020-Jun-30, at 13:28, Chris Lattner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Jun 29, 2020, at 10:15 PM, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>>
wrote:
>> 
>> IMO, a pull request isn't as clear given that they haven't been
used for contributions before. This is not a time to be innovative IMO. A branch
as a staging location has been used many times over the history of the project
though and seems nicely unambiguous in that regard.
> 
> I don’t have a opinion on this either way, but can git/GitHub maintain
forks within the same organization?  You could have llvm/llvm-project and
llvm/llvm-project-apple-staging or something like that?
I don't think GitHub allows you fork your own repo so I think it would be
disconnected from a GitHub point of view. That has a few downsides, although
I'm not sure how important they are.

Regardless, if a separate repo is preferred, then a better name from our
perspective would be "llvm-project-staging" (dropping the
"-apple" suffix). We could push a "staging/apple" branch
there.

Duncan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200630/973fc741/attachment.html>

> On Jun 30, 2020, at 2:02 PM, Duncan Exon Smith <dexonsmith at
apple.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 2020-Jun-30, at 13:28, Chris Lattner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Jun 29, 2020, at 10:15 PM, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>>
wrote:
>>> 
>>> IMO, a pull request isn't as clear given that they haven't
been used for contributions before. This is not a time to be innovative IMO. A
branch as a staging location has been used many times over the history of the
project though and seems nicely unambiguous in that regard.
>> 
>> I don’t have a opinion on this either way, but can git/GitHub maintain
forks within the same organization?  You could have llvm/llvm-project and
llvm/llvm-project-apple-staging or something like that?
> 
> I don't think GitHub allows you fork your own repo so I think it would
be disconnected from a GitHub point of view. That has a few downsides, although
I'm not sure how important they are.
> 
> Regardless, if a separate repo is preferred, then a better name from our
perspective would be "llvm-project-staging" (dropping the
"-apple" suffix). We could push a "staging/apple" branch
there.
Ok, I’m not very concerned either way, it was just a thought.  I’m very happy to
see this upstreaming work happen, thanks!

-Chris

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200630/5faad233/attachment.html>

On 6/30/20 2:07 PM, Chris Lattner via llvm-dev wrote:
>
>
>> On Jun 30, 2020, at 2:02 PM, Duncan Exon Smith <dexonsmith at
apple.com
>> <mailto:dexonsmith at apple.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 2020-Jun-30, at 13:28, Chris Lattner via llvm-dev 
>>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jun 29, 2020, at 10:15 PM, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev 
>>>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> IMO, a pull request isn't as clear given that they
haven't been
>>>> used for contributions before. This is not a time to be
innovative
>>>> IMO. A branch as a staging location has been used many times
over
>>>> the history of the project though and seems nicely unambiguous
in
>>>> that regard.
>>>
>>> I don’t have a opinion on this either way, but can git/GitHub 
>>> maintain forks within the same organization?  You could have 
>>> llvm/llvm-project and llvm/llvm-project-apple-staging or something 
>>> like that?
>>
>> I don't think GitHub allows you fork your own repo so I think it 
>> would be disconnected from a GitHub point of view. That has a few 
>> downsides, although I'm not sure how important they are.
>>
>> Regardless, if a separate repo is preferred, then a better name from 
>> our perspective would be "llvm-project-staging" (dropping the
>> "-apple" suffix). We could push a "staging/apple"
branch there.
>
> Ok, I’m not very concerned either way, it was just a thought.  I’m 
> very happy to see this upstreaming work happen, thanks!
>
> -Chris
I have a mild preference for the separate llvm-project-staging approach, 
but am not opposed to an in tree branch either.  The main argument I see 
for the separate repo is that the bar can be lower because the 
consequences for being "wrong" about the code being fully merged
quickly
are lower.

Or another thought, maybe we should even use the incubator flow here?  
Nothing says an incubator has to be long lived.  If we spun up an 
"incubator-staging-apple" repo, wouldn't that demonstrate the same
benefits?

Philip


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200701/f4ca022a/attachment.html>

On 6/30/20 4:02 PM, Duncan Exon Smith via llvm-dev
wrote:
> Regardless, if a separate repo is preferred, then a better name from our
perspective would be "llvm-project-staging" (dropping the
"-apple" suffix). We could push a "staging/apple" branch
there.
+1 for a separate repo with a neutral name and "company" branches.


* Unlikely we spam people

* Easy to understand from the github page

* Invisible to the existing users of llvm-project/llvm

* Unlikely to confuse people that have or download llvm (=accidental 
build of staging/apple)


I haven't really seen a downside, though I might have missed something.

The downsides of an additional project are small. I can see:
1) It's not possible to do pull requests from there, because GitHub
won't
treat it as a fork.
2) It's still visible to people (
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-June/142559.html)

In the end I don't have a strong opinion on whether this is a branch or a
repository, as long as we move ahead soon.

On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 4:29 PM Johannes Doerfert via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> On 6/30/20 4:02 PM, Duncan Exon Smith via llvm-dev wrote:
> > Regardless, if a separate repo is preferred, then a better name from
our
> perspective would be "llvm-project-staging" (dropping the
"-apple" suffix).
> We could push a "staging/apple" branch there.
>
> +1 for a separate repo with a neutral name and "company"
branches.
>
>
> * Unlikely we spam people
>
> * Easy to understand from the github page
>
> * Invisible to the existing users of llvm-project/llvm
>
> * Unlikely to confuse people that have or download llvm (=accidental
> build of staging/apple)
>
>
> I haven't really seen a downside, though I might have missed something.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200708/6504d34a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3852 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200708/6504d34a/attachment.bin>