search for: superprojects

Can anyone comment on their experiences with librarian-puppet or using git superproject with per puppet module repositories? We are in the midst of determining which route is optimal for our environment. It seems like using git superprojects would mean one less new tool for everyone to learn. What then would be the advantages of librarian-puppet? Thanks, Ryan Bowlby -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.goo...

...) is actually in line with the way I understand LLVM development policies and might be a nice addition if desired. In fact using a site like GitHub nicely automates the code review and commit process, and ensures that requests for review and commit aren't lost. On the comments about submodules/superprojects, I will agree they are slightly confusing at first, but it's primarily the people setting up the submodules that have to overcome that confusion. For en users they generally only need to care about running slightly different commands if they want to init and sync the superproject and use it to...

Just to be up-front, I normally work on very small projects and I am very much a non-core LLVM developer (I'm the MicroBlaze backend maintainer). However, we have had success where I work using the git branching model described in [1] and [2]. There is a git tool named "git-flow" that specifically supports this model and it seems like it might fit the LLVM development model so I

> On Jun 2, 2016, at 11:22 AM, dag at cray.com wrote: > > Matthias Braun via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes: > >> 3. Make sure we have ala llvm-project-submodules setup in the official >> account. (Optional or necessary for the buildbots?) > >> 7. Make sure bisecting with llvm-project-submodules is a good experience > > I would like to

On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Manuel Jacob via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 2016-05-31 22:45, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev wrote: > >> On May 31, 2016, at 1:31 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>> On 31 May 2016 at 21:28, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: >>>

On 30 June 2016 at 17:33, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote: > Agreed, the llvm-project repository can completely take on the role of the > SQL database in Renato's proposal. Hum, doing it in a separate server was suggested by the GitHub folks, so I just assumed they can't do that in the umbrella project for some reason. I'm all for using the umbrella if we can, I

...et a namespace collision b/c the module names are the same so puppet the ''repo'' type is the same and can''t be redefined. Certainly this is the right behavior but I''m kinda at a loss of how to rework things b/c of the collision. I had hoped to use git''s superprojects but it''s very hard to decree that the submodules are defaulted to a single branch. Also I like only the modules that have branched to show up in the dev modulepath, it removes question of where a module is being pulled from. I recognize that I could create a class that explicitly called...

> -----Original Message----- > From: cfe-dev [mailto:cfe-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Renato > Golin via cfe-dev > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 9:49 AM > To: Reid Kleckner > Cc: LLVM Dev; llvm-foundation at lists.llvm.org; Clang Dev; LLDB Dev > Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] Sequential ID Git hook > > On 30 June 2016 at 17:33, Reid Kleckner

On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Brad King <brad.king at kitware.com> wrote: > On 02/26/2014 12:43 PM, Alexey Samsonov wrote: > > Do you think it makes sense to land my ExternalProject_Add patch > > so that others can experiment with it? I can add quit with a > > fatal_error/warning if the build tree rules are generated with Ninja. > > Since it is conditional on

Hey all, If you''re like me and use git submodules heavily (I vendor everything, and every plugin is a submodule), you might like to hear about code published this morning to make it easier to manage multiple git submodules in a shared-server environment. It''s imaginatively titled ''git-rake'', and it does Good Things like: * aggregates submodule commit logs into

On 6/30/2016 5:20 PM, Robinson, Paul via cfe-dev wrote: > We were using tags for a while in our own SVN->git conversion internally. > (git branch is pushed to SVN and the SVN r-number used to create a tag.) > They are convenient for some things, but each tag adds a new (if small) > file to .git/tags and I don't know that it really scales well when you > are talking about

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 10:12 PM, Greg Fitzgerald <garious at gmail.com> wrote: > > ExternalProject_Add(compiler-rt ...) > > So that was quite the experiment. Looking at > clang/runtime/CMakeLists.txt, I'm not seeing a lot of bang for buck > here, and it looks like this file is prone to bit rot. Could you please elaborate on this? In fact, I don't plan to give

On 3/17/23 13:46, Andrey Drobyshev wrote: > On 3/17/23 10:37, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> On 3/16/23 17:14, Andrey Drobyshev wrote: >>> On 3/15/23 00:16, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >>>> On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 04:06:18PM +0200, Andrey Drobyshev wrote: >>>>> Speaking of "make check": could you point out, for future reference, >>>>>

Hi Greg, On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 11:18 PM, Greg Fitzgerald <garious at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Alexey, > > CMAKE_PREFIX_PATH is a convenient mechanism for exposing prebuilt > install directories to a CMake build. It contains a colon-separated > list of paths. Each path points to a directory that contains > directory names that are meaningful to CMake, including

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 9:16 AM, James Y Knight via lldb-dev < lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I don't think we should do any of that. It's too complicated -- and I > don't see the reason to even do it. > > There's a need for the "llvm-project" repository -- that's been discussed > plenty -- but where does the need for a separate