search for: objector

...and responses to concerns > are unknown and therefore not addressable. I didn't want private meetings either, but repeatedly requesting public feedback for the RFC or patches hadn't provided reasoning behind any concerns that people had. The agreement reached at the meeting was for the objectors to post their reasons for objecting and counter-proposal in public so discussion could take place, and Arm would investigate the details of the counter-proposal. Unfortunately, that post never happened, so I found myself a bit stuck and had to post it for them -- not a situation I wanted. I have...

...ears, we plan a lot of changes in networking stack, many of which will require changing the protocols, as well. Keeping them in compilable state would require additional manpower, but it is very probable, that after all the changes they will be utterly broken, albeit compilable. P.S. I account any objector as taker of maintainership :) [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_v10.5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_v10.6 [2] http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/iosswrel/ps8802/ps5460/product_bulletin_c25-520459.html [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Enterprise_Server#OES-NetWare [...

Does anyone has already tried to use R with an object database such as O2 or objectore, or versant ? Does anyone knows an api to store R object in such a database and to load R object from such a database ? -------------------------------------------------------- Ce message et toutes les pieces jointes peuvent etre confidentiels, et, de plus, peuvent etre couverts par un priv...

> On Mar 14, 2019, at 5:45 AM, Graham Hunter via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > We would like to be able to reach consensus on an approach around the end > of EuroLLVM this year so that we can begin a full implementation. EuroLLVM will be a very good occasion to hear all the opinions and reach consensus on the approach. @Graham, maybe you should set up a

We held a round-table at the llvm dev conference about what other pieces of Github infrastructure we may want to use. This thread in particular is about switching to github issue tracking. Use of other parts of Github functionality was also discussed -- but that should be for other email threads. Most of the ideas here were from other people. I *believe* this proposal represents the overall

Hello fans of the auto keyword! We now have a policy on how LLVM toolchains get updated <https://reviews.llvm.org/rL351765>! Let’s put that policy to good use, and talk about how we’ll move all monorepo projects past C++11. Previous Discussions LLVM dev meeting 2018 BoF "Migrating to C++14, and beyond! <http://llvm.org/devmtg/2018-10/talk-abstracts.html#bof3>" A Short