similar to: [cfe-dev] [Proposal] Automatically Cc: cfe-commits@ on Clang reviews

Forgot to mention: > Also, how would arcanist pick up two callsigns here? Wouldn't it just pick the from the closest surrounding .arcconfig? The review request will belong to a single repository, as you noticed (from the closest .arcconfig to where the arc command was invoked). However, when commits land, they will be imported under either one (rL for LLVM diffs) or two (rL + rC for e.g.

+llvm-dev, so we get wider input :) Given how unfortunate reviews that are started without cc'ing the right list are (basically folks need to re-send the review from scratch), I support this idea. Ben, couldn't rL still be available for all projects? (and be the main project for LLVM). On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 5:18 PM Ben Hamilton via cfe-dev < cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:58 AM Ben Hamilton <benhamilton at google.com> wrote: > Absolutely — I should have mentioned that we would keep the main rL > project and continue to use it. > Your original email said "Moving forward, only LLVM commits will be identified with the prefix rL (as in https://reviews.llvm.org/rL12345) — each project will get its own unique prefix, which

It seems like this has already been set up for all the projects except for libunwind. Can we create a Differential repository for it as well? I'll be happy to update its .arcconfig once that's done. On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 9:02 AM Ben Hamilton via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Forgot to mention: > > > > Also, how would arcanist pick up two callsigns

On 10 January 2018 at 21:06, Petr Hosek via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > It seems like this has already been set up for all the projects except for > libunwind. Can we create a Differential repository for it as well? I'll be > happy to update its .arcconfig once that's done. Additionally, it might be worth considering if this change means the guidance

Files '.arcconfig' still contain reference to http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/, so arcanist doesn't work. Thanks, --Serge 2014-04-06 3:11 GMT+07:00 Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com>: > On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 8:42 PM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote: > >> Short update - the sending to the *-commits lists doesn't work yet - I'm >>

Thanks for the catch Dead! I'll send out patches to update .arcconfig files to use https. On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 3:22 PM Dean Michael Berris <dberris at google.com> wrote: > Thanks Eric, > > If you're like me who started doing this and found some weird errors, you > may have to do the following instead: > > $ arc install-certificate

On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 5:29 AM <paul.robinson at sony.com> wrote: > One particular change: I've disabled notifications for the duplicate > Subversion meta-repos... so, for example, a commit to Clang will still get > 2 notifications (rL and rG). Before yesterday, this should have sent 3: one > each for rL, rG, and rC. Projects not in the monorepo will get > notifications

The parallel-libs LLVM subproject is now set up and ready for code development. This is the subproject that is meant to house the StreamExecutor parallel runtime library, possibly the OpenMP target runtime libraries, and other libraries devoted to handling parallelism in LLVM (see the README currently checked into the parallel-libs base directory for the project charter). The parallel-libs

Does phabricator have a way of changing the default commit message template through the per-repo .arcconfig? Making the default template include the appropriate mailing list automatically might go a long way to mitigating our problems. It doesn't help when uploading through the web UI though. -- Sean Silva -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

I tweaked the notifications yesterday, hopefully we don't see more spam storms. For filtering git refs: this is something that has changed substantially in Phabricator over the past couple of months, but I think I've managed to restrict notifications to only "master." (Although, again, this has changed a lot... getting this right depends on my own archaeological skills for

I've gone through Code Reviews with Phabriactor[1], Arcanist Quick Start[2] and Arcanist User Guide arc diff[3]. But I'm unable to setup reviewers my editor pops up and there is a "Reviewers:" line and but I'm unable email addresses directly. It seems it wants reviewers passed on the command line or some how in .arcconfig. But I haven't been able to find any

The monorepo prototype at https://github.com/llvm-project/llvm-project-20170507 is currently 9 hours behind. I forget who’s responsible for the script(s) updating the monorepo(s), and it would be great if we can inform them of the state of the monorepo. Cheers -- Dean

While playing with sanitizer in a downstream project, I found out this. /Users/davide/work/llvm-monorepo/llvm-project-20170507/llvm/tools/llvm-mc-assemble-fuzzer/llvm-mc-assemble-fuzzer.cpp:207:32: error: reference to type 'std::unique_ptr<MCCodeEmitter>' could not bind to an lvalue of type 'llvm::MCCodeEmitter *' UseDwarfDirectory, IP, CE, MAB, ShowInst));

It worked in August. Last time I’ve asked (again, in August) someone did seem to care, but it is inevitable it would bitrot if it’s not built in any of the bots. George > On May 4, 2018, at 2:53 PM, Davide Italiano via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > While playing with sanitizer in a downstream project, I found out this. > >

Thank you. I went ahead with a speculative fix in r331568. I'm not familiar _at all_ with the tool, so, although the fix was straightforward, another pair of eyes from somebody familiar with the tool would be appreciated. On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 5:10 PM, George Karpenkov <ekarpenkov at apple.com> wrote: > It worked in August. > Last time I’ve asked (again, in August) someone did

Hi, I got a forced update when pulling today. If I merge master to a local branch, I get a bunch of add/add conflicts. This same commit exists under several hashes: https://github.com/llvm-project/llvm-project-20170507/commit/687841777ef505 https://github.com/llvm-project/llvm-project-20170507/commit/74725885552 Did someone push -f to the monorepo after doing branch surgery? Maybe there was a

On Sun, May 7, 2017 at 12:07 AM, NAKAMURA Takumi via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I have done just now. 5 repos added including debuginfo-tests. > ATM, it includes 17 repos total. > > - Created the new repo; https://github.com/llvm- > project/llvm-project-20170507.git > Branches will come later. > - The previous repository has a merge commit that

I am planing to add projects into https://github.com/llvm-project/llvm-project in near future, possibly this week. Before doing that, I would like to ask users of it. 1st option is my preference in each paragraph. Let me know if you have other suggestions. * What is added? I will add; libunwind, llgo, openmp and parallel-libs. May I also add debuginfo-tests? * Will inactive projects be

Possibly unrelated but since someone asked, I wonder why we don’t have monorepo for releases? For example a .tar.s containing all LLVM6.0 components placed at correct location Zhang > 在 2018年8月30日，18:16，Dean Michael Berris via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> 写道： > > Thanks! >> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 7:31 PM NAKAMURA Takumi <geek4civic at gmail.com> wrote: