search for: looooooong

Hello folks, As mentioned some time ago[1], we’ve had a long (looooooong) series of discussions about establishing a code-of-conduct for the LLVM project as a whole over on the llvm-dev thread and the http://reviews.llvm.org/D13741 code review. The discussion has largely died down for some time, and towards the end there has been pretty wide support for the draft wordi...

...your continuing efforts on the Code of Conduct! I appreciate the efforts and strongly support this direction. ~Aaron On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Chandler Carruth via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hello folks, > > As mentioned some time ago[1], we’ve had a long (looooooong) series of > discussions about establishing a code-of-conduct for the LLVM project as a > whole over on the llvm-dev thread and the http://reviews.llvm.org/D13741 > code review. > > The discussion has largely died down for some time, and towards the end > there has been pretty wid...

...ber of the llvm community anymore and would be terrified to interact with another llvm developer in a social setting. Rafael On 30 June 2016 at 14:55, Chandler Carruth via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hello folks, > > As mentioned some time ago[1], we’ve had a long (looooooong) series of > discussions about establishing a code-of-conduct for the LLVM project as a > whole over on the llvm-dev thread and the http://reviews.llvm.org/D13741 > code review. > > The discussion has largely died down for some time, and towards the end > there has been pretty wid...

...ppreciate the efforts and strongly support this direction. > > ~Aaron +1 -Hal > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Chandler Carruth via cfe-dev > <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hello folks, > > > > As mentioned some time ago[1], we’ve had a long (looooooong) series > > of > > discussions about establishing a code-of-conduct for the LLVM > > project as a > > whole over on the llvm-dev thread and the > > http://reviews.llvm.org/D13741 > > code review. > > > > The discussion has largely died down for some t...

Thanks, Chandler, for all your work on this. I’m glad to see this moving forward. -Jim > On Jun 30, 2016, at 11:55 AM, Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hello folks, > > As mentioned some time ago[1], we’ve had a long (looooooong) series of discussions about establishing a code-of-conduct for the LLVM project as a whole over on the llvm-dev thread and the http://reviews.llvm.org/D13741 <http://reviews.llvm.org/D13741> code review. > > The discussion has largely died down for some time, and towards the end there...

...discretion in there that you are afraid may apply to you if taken to some extreme? > Rafael > > On 30 June 2016 at 14:55, Chandler Carruth via cfe-dev > <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hello folks, > > > > As mentioned some time ago[1], we’ve had a long (looooooong) series of > > discussions about establishing a code-of-conduct for the LLVM project as > a > > whole over on the llvm-dev thread and the http://reviews.llvm.org/D13741 > > code review. > > > > The discussion has largely died down for some time, and towards the end...

...etion in there that you are afraid may apply to you if taken to some extreme? Rafael On 30 June 2016 at 14:55, Chandler Carruth via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > Hello folks, > > As mentioned some time ago[1], we’ve had a long (looooooong) series of > discussions about establishing a code-of-conduct for the LLVM project as a > whole over on the llvm-dev thread and the http://reviews.llvm.org/D13741 > code review. > > The discussion has largely died down for some time, and towards the end > there has been pretty wid...

...t you are afraid may apply to you if > taken to some extreme? > > > > Rafael > > On 30 June 2016 at 14:55, Chandler Carruth via cfe-dev > > <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hello folks, > > > > As mentioned some time ago[1], we’ve had a long (looooooong) series of > > discussions about establishing a code-of-conduct for the LLVM project as > a > > whole over on the llvm-dev thread and the http://reviews.llvm.org/D13741 > > code review. > > > > The discussion has largely died down for some time, and towards the end...

...you are afraid may apply to you if taken to some extreme? > > > > Rafael > > On 30 June 2016 at 14:55, Chandler Carruth via cfe-dev > > <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hello folks, > > > > As mentioned some time ago[1], we’ve had a long (looooooong) series of > > discussions about establishing a code-of-conduct for the LLVM project as a > > whole over on the llvm-dev thread and the http://reviews.llvm.org/D13741 > > code review. > > > > The discussion has largely died down for some time, and towards the end >...

Hello, (I'm reposting this after my first attempt about 25 minutes ago has not come through to me. I am leaving out the looooooong debug log dump, in case the listserv didn't like the massive content, but it will be provided upon request.) I have a RHEL 6.5 server that was configured to use Samba 3.6.9-167 to authenticate against a Windows 2008 R2 Active Directory domain. The authentication was working fine, but we neede...

...ou anticipate strong support. Is any (in)formal vote planned? Will this just get enacted, "who" decided.. On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 2:55 AM, Chandler Carruth via lldb-dev < lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hello folks, > > As mentioned some time ago[1], we’ve had a long (looooooong) series of > discussions about establishing a code-of-conduct for the LLVM project as a > whole over on the llvm-dev thread and the http://reviews.llvm.org/D13741 > code review. > > The discussion has largely died down for some time, and towards the end > there has been pretty wid...

Minor vSockets fixes, two of which were reported on LKML. Andy King (2): VSOCK: Remove hypervisor-only socket option VSOCK: Don't reject PF_VSOCK protocol Dmitry Torokhov (2): VSOCK: get rid of EXPORT_SYMTAB VSOCK: get rid of vsock_version.h include/uapi/linux/vm_sockets.h | 8 -------- net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 7 ++----- net/vmw_vsock/vmci_transport.c | 2 --

Minor vSockets fixes, two of which were reported on LKML. Andy King (2): VSOCK: Remove hypervisor-only socket option VSOCK: Don't reject PF_VSOCK protocol Dmitry Torokhov (2): VSOCK: get rid of EXPORT_SYMTAB VSOCK: get rid of vsock_version.h include/uapi/linux/vm_sockets.h | 8 -------- net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 7 ++----- net/vmw_vsock/vmci_transport.c | 2 --