similar to: [LLVMdev] 3.2 Release - RC2 source and binary tarballs available for download

Akira, > Pawel, > > Is it still not too late to merge these patches? > > r168471 > r168460 > r168458 > r168456 > r168455 > r168453 > r168450 > r168448 > > These patches fix a bug in mips backend's GOT implementation and add > support for big-GOT relocations. That's quite a list of patches! To get them into the 3.2 release you would first

Pawel, Is it still not too late to merge these patches? r168471 r168460 r168458 r168456 r168455 r168453 r168450 r168448 These patches fix a bug in mips backend's GOT implementation and add support for big-GOT relocations. Thank you. On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Pawel Wodnicki <root at 32bitmicro.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Just a quick reminder that the November 29th

Alright, can you please pull in r169280? On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Pawel Wodnicki <root at 32bitmicro.com> wrote: > On 12/4/2012 10:14 AM, Justin Holewinski wrote: > > What is the procedure for updating the release notes? I've been > committing > > changes to the trunk version, should I be editing them elsewhere? Or > will > > the trunk version be

On Nov 27, 2012, at 7:35 PM, Pawel Wodnicki <root at 32bitmicro.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Just a quick reminder that the November 29th (10p.m. PST) is the > end of Phase 1 testing and Release Candidate 2 (RC2) deadline. > After RC2 deadline, LLVM-Clang 3.2 release will be considered feature > complete and no new functionality can be added. > > With 2 days left

Hello, Just a quick reminder that the November 29th (10p.m. PST) is the end of Phase 1 testing and Release Candidate 2 (RC2) deadline. After RC2 deadline, LLVM-Clang 3.2 release will be considered feature complete and no new functionality can be added. With 2 days left please use following guidelines when initiating request for patches before RC2 deadline. I will be happy to merge *approved*

On 12/4/2012 10:14 AM, Justin Holewinski wrote: > What is the procedure for updating the release notes? I've been committing > changes to the trunk version, should I be editing them elsewhere? Or will > the trunk version be merged in? The exact procedure is not spelled out but I think the easiest would be to merge relevant "ReleaseNotes.html" changes from the trunk,

Anton, > Pawel, > > We all understand that you're pretty new to release process, etc., but > I think you should understand the implications of your actions. > > You just created a lot of harm for really huge pile of users - the > ones who downloads the tarball via some automated build system and > rely on the known good checksum. This includes, but not limited to to

Pawel, We all understand that you're pretty new to release process, etc., but I think you should understand the implications of your actions. You just created a lot of harm for really huge pile of users - the ones who downloads the tarball via some automated build system and rely on the known good checksum. This includes, but not limited to to the users of FreeBSD, Gentoo, etc. Even worse,

On 1/11/2013 2:51 PM, Justin Holewinski wrote: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Pawel Wodnicki <root at 32bitmicro.com> wrote: > >> On 1/11/2013 2:40 PM, Brooks Davis wrote: >>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:33:17PM +0100, Benjamin Kramer wrote: >>>> >>>> On 11.01.2013, at 21:31, Justin Holewinski >>>> <justin.holewinski at

Pawel, First, all your help with the 3.2 release is greatly appreciated. I do not think anyone is saying otherwise. I apologize for the lack of documentation regarding this issue. I do ask that you consult with previous release manager (myself or Bill) to determine what the best course of action is. There is a lot of room to improve our release process, but its a collaborative effort. You are

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Pawel Wodnicki <root at 32bitmicro.com> wrote: > On 1/11/2013 2:40 PM, Brooks Davis wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:33:17PM +0100, Benjamin Kramer wrote: > >> > >> On 11.01.2013, at 21:31, Justin Holewinski > >> <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 3:26

On Nov 16, 2012, at 3:52 PM, Pawel Wodnicki <root at 32bitmicro.com> wrote: > >>> This approach is fine for casual reader but >>> does not work for scripting or any automated >>> way of dealing with the build. >> Will you please clarify how the automation / scripting helps with the >> patch approval process? > > > Generally release patch

What is the procedure for updating the release notes? I've been committing changes to the trunk version, should I be editing them elsewhere? Or will the trunk version be merged in? On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:12 PM, 32bitmicro <root at 32bitmicro.com> wrote: > Hi, > > > Are we going to have a mingw release this time? > > As far as I know there is no change from 3.1

Hi, > Are we going to have a mingw release this time? As far as I know there is no change from 3.1 and Mignw is considered experimental. Incidentally RC2 mingw32 binaries have been uploaded and are available for download and testing. http://llvm.org/pre-releases/3.2/rc2/clang+llvm-3.2rc2-i386-mingw32-EXPERIMENTAL.tar.gz Pawel > > > On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, 32bitmicro

Are we going to have a mingw release this time? On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:54 PM, 32bitmicro <root at 32bitmicro.com> wrote: > Hello, > > - State of the 3.2 release > > Release is progressing as scheduled, RC2 has > been created and is being tested. RC2 sources > and binaries can be downloaded from: > > http://llvm.org/pre-releases/3.2/rc2/ > > > -

Hello! We are proudly announce that CerbNG-1.0 Release Candidate 2 is now avaliable. There are many changes from RC1 (many new functionalities, some bug fixes, new interesting policies, new regression tests and more). It seems that CerbNG is stable for now, so we hope that the next version is going to be final 1.0 series release. We count on feedback from FreeBSD community in founding bugs (if

Hello! We are proudly announce that CerbNG-1.0 Release Candidate 2 is now avaliable. There are many changes from RC1 (many new functionalities, some bug fixes, new interesting policies, new regression tests and more). It seems that CerbNG is stable for now, so we hope that the next version is going to be final 1.0 series release. We count on feedback from FreeBSD community in founding bugs (if

Hello, - State of the 3.2 release Release is progressing as scheduled, RC2 has been created and is being tested. RC2 sources and binaries can be downloaded from: http://llvm.org/pre-releases/3.2/rc2/ - Release notes and documentation With RC2 the 3.2 release has reached the point where it is feature complete and we can turn the attention to updating documentation, especially the release

On 1/11/2013 3:59 PM, Brooks Davis wrote: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 02:47:01PM -0600, Pawel Wodnicki wrote: >> On 1/11/2013 2:40 PM, Brooks Davis wrote: >>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:33:17PM +0100, Benjamin Kramer >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 11.01.2013, at 21:31, Justin Holewinski >>>> <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> wrote:

>> This approach is fine for casual reader but >> does not work for scripting or any automated >> way of dealing with the build. > Will you please clarify how the automation / scripting helps with the > patch approval process? Generally release patch process works like this: - patch gets checked-in on the trunk - developer sends message to the code owner who approves