similar to: [LLVMdev] Release 3.1 PRs -- Please Help!

Hi folks, The LLVM Bay Area social needs to move from Tied House because they closed. We’ll be across the street at Steins beer garden on January 2nd, 7PM, ask for “LLVM”. Please pass the word along so everyone makes it to the right place! We’ll figure out something longer term. JF

I have an application that has models for beer styles. Every beer style will have a name and description. It will also contain a list of beer models. Every beer model will contain a name. I want my application to fill in the list of styles with some default data. #Beer migration file: class CreateBeers < ActiveRecord::Migration def change create_table :beers do |t| t.string

; *99: ; 99 bottles of beer on the wall. exten => *99,1,Noop(99 Bottles of beer on the wall) exten => *99,n,Answer() exten => *99,n,Set(bottles=99) exten => *99,n(loop),Noop(There are ${bottles} bottles of beer on the wall) exten => *99,n,SayNumber(${bottles}) exten => *99,n,Noop(Take one done and pass it round and there's) exten =>

I've been able to use security = ads in smb.conf, and connect OK, but it must be falling back to domain. When I run net ads join I get the error (debug trace below): ads_connect: No logon servers Here is my krb5.conf: [logging] default = FILE:/var/log/krb5libs.log kdc = FILE:/var/log/krb5kdc.log admin_server = FILE:/var/log/kadmind.log [libdefaults] default_realm = BEER [realms] BEER

Now that we're on GitHub, can we *please* move to GitHub PRs? As much as I hate git, I hate Phabricator/Archanist even more. They're super clunky and makes working in git that much worse. -bw -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200107/e47b7e36/attachment.html>

> On Jan 7, 2020, at 17:35, Jonas Devlieghere via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 5:16 PM Bill Wendling via cfe-dev > <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 4:59 PM Doerfert, Johannes <jdoerfert at anl.gov> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Bill, >>> >>> On 01/07, Bill

What was the verdict? Any plans to move? I hate coding anything knowing that I'll have to use Phabricator. It's like nails on a chalkboard. -bw On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 4:13 PM Finkel, Hal J. <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > > On 1/7/20 6:03 PM, Bill Wendling via llvm-dev wrote: > > Now that we're on GitHub, can we *please* move to GitHub PRs? As much as I > hate

Hi: I have a dataframe containing comma seperated group of words such as milk,bread bread,butter beer,diaper beer,diaper milk,bread beer,diaper I want to output the frequency of occurrence of comma separated words for each row and collapse duplicate rows, to make the output as shown in the following dataframe: milk,bread 2 bread,butter 1 beer,diaper 3 milk,bread 2 Thanks for help! deb

Renato Golin <rengolin at gmail.com> writes: > > Don't they give you the opportunity to amend the commit message, at least? I vaguely remember it's possible. > If you mean "amend" like in "git commit --amend", it's generally a bad idea to rewrite repository history that has already been published. If you mean "amend" the message in the Web

If you're in the bay area next week and would like to socialize with your peers in an environment where talk about LLVM is encouraged, then you should come to the LLVM Bay-Area Social! The next LLVM bay-area social will be Wednesday, Oct 5th, but at a new location! Yard House in San Jose isn't the most transit accessible, so we'd appreciate anyone willing to drive others. On the plus

I'm not sure a decision was already made as such. I think it's more that there was a flurry of conversation last time with lots of conflicting opinions, and then the conversation just fizzled out. FWIW, I like Phabricator but I'm willing to try GitHub. Overall I think we should take the same approach that eventually led to Phabricator being widely adopted: We should allow GitHub

On 01/15, Nicolai Hähnle via cfe-dev wrote: > On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 11:41 AM Renato Golin <rengolin at gmail.com> wrote: > > We rarely approve some patches and not others in a series, and when we > > do, we ask people to create a new series without the approved patch, > > or split them, so that we can continue reviewing the series. > > This has simply not been

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 4:59 PM Doerfert, Johannes <jdoerfert at anl.gov> wrote: > Hi Bill, > > On 01/07, Bill Wendling via llvm-dev wrote: > > Then perhaps those opposed could suggest how to use Phabricator/Arcanist > so > > that I don't throw my keyboard through my monitor? > > Please explain your problems, w/o the hyperbole, so people can actually do >

On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 19:10, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > Can you point to examples of that - where Phab links have been used to express non-mechanically-dependent patches? Not at the top of my head, but since that's not what we're talking about, I'll go to the next point. > Approval order isn't commit order - I'm more than happy to approve a

Is LLVM IR more than a compiler IR? Have we made progress on moving to git? And how does the greedy allocator work anyways? This month's LLVM social is happening today, at 7pm in a new location! I'm looking forward to seeing everyone there! Nick On 28 September 2011 15:20, Nick Lewycky <nlewycky at google.com> wrote: > If you're in the bay area next week and would like to

On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 5:35 PM Jonas Devlieghere <jonas at devlieghere.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 5:16 PM Bill Wendling via cfe-dev > <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 4:59 PM Doerfert, Johannes <jdoerfert at anl.gov> > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Bill, > >> > >> On 01/07, Bill Wendling

On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 11:32 AM Renato Golin via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 02:26, Daniel Sanders via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > It's worth mentioning that Phabricator can read strings of the format > 'Depends on D1234' from commit messages and create those relationships for > you. >

On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 16:09, David Greene <dag at cray.com> wrote: > The question is if everything is approved and the author does a final > cleanup as alluded to above, does that final cleanup also need to go > through review? We don't enforce that now, so I see no reason to start doing it. Phab reviews, once approved, can have last-minute modifications and direct commits.

> On Jan 23, 2020, at 08:37, David Greene via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hubert Tong <hubert.reinterpretcast at gmail.com> writes: > >>> I read this as the refresh being an entirely new GitHub PR. Is that >>> right? Normally I would expect the same PR to be used but the rebase >>> would cause a force-push of the branch

Hi David, On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 12:51 PM David Greene via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I would like to understand better how people use Phab's advanced > features and why. For example, what drives the need for patch series > and dependence relationships? Some walk-through examples would be very > helpful. Here's a somewhat more complex example of