similar to: [LLVMdev] Announcement: LLVM 2.8 Branch Created

LLVMers, The LLVM 2.2 release branches have been created! Over the next 2 days, I will be generating the pre-release tar balls. I will send out mail once I am done and then the community pre-release testing will begin. I'll also be sending out detailed instructions and the release schedule. As a reminder, please do not commit patches to the release branch. Please email me with a

It's that time again! (Well, it was that time yesterday, but I made a mistake.) The LLVM 2.9 release is now underway! 2.9 Will Be The Last llvm-gcc Release! That's right! It's the end of an era. The llvm-gcc front-end has served us very well over the years, but with the advent of Clang and DragonEgg it is starting to suffer from bit rot. Starting with the 3.0 release, Clang will be

Hi all, Testing for LLVM 3.0 release candidate 1 is now under way! We will soon have binaries available for you to download and try. Those who would like to compile things and try them out for themselves can grab the source tarballs here: http://llvm.org/pre-releases/3.0/ A Word About Patches I neglected to send out instructions on how to get patches into the LLVM 3.0 branch. All patches must

Hi Bill, Do we have a list of which PRs have been filed that are considered release blockers? -Jim On Oct 17, 2011, at 4:33 PM, Bill Wendling wrote: > Hi all, > > Testing for LLVM 3.0 release candidate 1 is now under way! We will soon have binaries available for you to download and try. Those who would like to compile things and try them out for themselves can grab the source

Not yet. That is, I don't think any have been filed at all for 3.0. I don't know whether to be happy or worried. :-) Any that are regressions should be marked with the 'regression' keyword and be a release blocker. -bw On Oct 20, 2011, at 8:40 AM, Jim Grosbach wrote: > Hi Bill, > > Do we have a list of which PRs have been filed that are considered release blockers?

Hi all, We branched for the 3.1 release! (Yay!) If there are any fixes which you think should go into the release, please contact the code owners (http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#owners) so that they can approve the patches. No patches will be accepted into the 3.1 release without prior approval! This should be a great release! :-) -bw

On Mar 8, 2011, at 10:34 AM, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote: > On 03/08/11 04:01, Bill Wendling wrote: >> It's that time again! (Well, it was that time yesterday, but I made a mistake.) The LLVM 2.9 release is now underway! > >> Developers: >> >> Top-of-tree is now open for submissions. The 2.9 release branch and tags are available for you to check out and test.

how to get this branch? still svn co http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk llvm? Thank you. On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Bill Wendling <wendling at apple.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > We branched for the 3.1 release! (Yay!) > > If there are any fixes which you think should go into the release, please > contact the code owners

Fwiw, I approve both of these patches if they are still unmerged. -Chris On Nov 18, 2012, at 11:41 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi Pawel, > >>> Can you provide some examples of the problems you are seeing? >> >> Here is what happens. >> >> I get a message "could you please include/add/merge this r16xxxx into >>

What was the revision the branch was made from? On Apr 16, 2012, at 11:16 PM, Bill Wendling <wendling at apple.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > We branched for the 3.1 release! (Yay!) > > If there are any fixes which you think should go into the release, please contact the code owners (http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#owners) so that they can approve the patches. No

17.04.2012, 10:16, "Bill Wendling" <wendling at apple.com>: > Hi all, > > We branched for the 3.1 release! (Yay!) > > If there are any fixes which you think should go into the release, please contact the code owners (http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#owners) so that they can approve the patches. No patches will be accepted into the 3.1 release without prior

On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi Pawel, > > >>> Can you provide some examples of the problems you are seeing? >> >> >> Here is what happens. >> >> I get a message "could you please include/add/merge this r16xxxx into >> 3.2?". And my immediate reaction is sure, no problem this

Hi Pawel, >> Can you provide some examples of the problems you are seeing? > > Here is what happens. > > I get a message "could you please include/add/merge this r16xxxx into > 3.2?". And my immediate reaction is sure, no problem this fixes > PR/issue/crash so it is important. But are you the code owner > and do you approve? So I have to go and start checking

> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Pawel Wodnicki <pawel at 32bitmicro.com>wrote: > >> On 11/17/2012 6:35 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: >>> >>> On Nov 17, 2012, at 9:57 AM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I think that the code owner process is becoming complicated and I am >> not sure if it serves Chris's

We have branched for the 3.2 release! Some "sticky reminders": You can get all of the 3.2 code from the appropriate .../branches/release_32/ You can track state of the 3.2 release through so called "Umbrella bug" : http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=13893 Hopefully it will not "rain bugs" on us and we will not need it that much! After branching all patches

Hi developers! This is to announce that LLVM 3.0 will be branching in one week at: 07:00:00 p.m. Friday October 14, 2011 PST 02:00:00 a.m. Saturday October 15, 2011 GMT What this means for you? Please get any last minute changes to your 3.0 features into the tree as soon as possible. Keep a very close eye on the build bots and the nightly tests. Please fix any regressions as quickly as

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Pawel Wodnicki" <pawel at 32bitmicro.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "Joe Abbey" <joe.abbey at gmail.com>, llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu, "Nadav Rotem" <nrotem at apple.com> > Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2012 2:04:10 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] !!! 3.2 Release

> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Joe Abbey" <joe.abbey at gmail.com> >> To: "Nadav Rotem" <nrotem at apple.com> >> Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu >> Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2012 1:25:04 PM >> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] !!! 3.2 Release branch patching and the Code Owners >> >> >> On Nov 17, 2012, at

It is very exciting to see experimental Windows support listed for 3.3. Is there documentation somewhere that tracks what works and what doesn't in this configuration, particularly for C++?. Otherwise it is difficult for those not actively involved in developing Windows support to know what to expect when experimenting. Thanks, Andrew On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Bill Wendling

I can't find any release_32 branch at http://llvm.org/git/llvm.git or http://llvm.org/git/clang.git. /Patrik Hägglund -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Pawel Wodnicki Sent: den 12 november 2012 07:03 To: llvmdev; cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: [LLVMdev] 3.2 Release has branched :T+2 hours We have branched