similar to: [LLVMdev] phabricator says "this commit is still importing"

On 11 May 2014 13:25, Alex Bradbury <asb at asbradbury.org> wrote: > On 6 May 2014 09:42, Jay Foad <jay.foad at gmail.com> wrote: >> I followed a link from LLVM Weekly to http://reviews.llvm.org/rL207598 and got: >> >> " >> Still Importing... >> >> This commit is still importing. Changes will be visible once the >> import finishes.

On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Alex Bradbury <asb at asbradbury.org> wrote: > On 12 May 2014 08:35, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote: > > On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> > wrote: > >> > >> It seems that we cannot execute svn commands against llvm-project any > >> more: > >> $ svn

On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote: > It seems that we cannot execute svn commands against llvm-project any more: > $ svn diff -r 208457:208458 'http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project' > svn: access to '/svn/llvm-project/!svn/vcc/default' forbidden > > Tanja, any idea what changed? > (Tanya, sorry for messing up the name,

Hi all, Some discussions the night before prompted me to do a short lightning talk on 'improving the experience of first-time contributors' at the LLVM Cauldron back in September. I intended to write it up as an RFC, but have only just got round to doing so. I've tried to make this email self-contained, but you may still want to look at the slides or recording of the lightning talk.

Has anyone else noticed Phabricator sending emails saying: This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state "Needs Review". when the review clearly has been accepted by someone? Some recent examples: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83952 https://reviews.llvm.org/D80116 https://reviews.llvm.org/D81267 Thanks, Jay.

On 14 November 2017 at 16:03, Alex Bradbury <asb at lowrisc.org> wrote: > Dear list, > > At the RISC-V BoF at the LLVM Dev Meeting and the longer working > session the day after, those of us working on RISC-V with LLVM decided > it would be worthwhile to schedule regular sync-up calls in order to > better co-ordinate ongoing work between different developers. This is >

Hi all. I'm assuming most people reading this email are familiar with LLVM's code review process <http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#code-reviews> as well as LLVM Weekly, the development newsletter I've written and sent out every Monday since Jan 2014. Since that time, it's provided something of a "signal boost" for important mailing list discussions and

Dear list, At the RISC-V BoF at the LLVM Dev Meeting and the longer working session the day after, those of us working on RISC-V with LLVM decided it would be worthwhile to schedule regular sync-up calls in order to better co-ordinate ongoing work between different developers. This is primarily to sync-up, share blocking issues and so on. I understand something similar was done during the

Yea, I'll try to get that set up eventually. It'll just take longer to push that change than the little splash. On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Alex Bradbury <asb at asbradbury.org> wrote: > On 5 April 2014 17:26, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote: > > We (hopefully successfully) migrated our phabricator servers to a new > home. > > As part of

LLVM Weekly - #52, Dec 29th 2014 =============================== If you prefer, you can read a HTML version of this email at <http://llvmweekly.org/issue/52>. Welcome to the fifty-second issue of LLVM Weekly, a weekly newsletter (published every Monday) covering developments in LLVM, Clang, and related projects. LLVM Weekly is brought to you by [Alex Bradbury](http://asbradbury.org).

We (hopefully successfully) migrated our phabricator servers to a new home. As part of that migration, we also moved it to a new easier to remember location. Please find it at: http://reviews.llvm.org Make sure to update your bookmarks, and let us know of any problems you see. Happy hacking! /Manuel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

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

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Alex Bradbury <asb at asbradbury.org> wrote: > On 27 August 2017 at 00:01, Alex Bradbury <asb at asbradbury.org> wrote: >> Hi all. I'm assuming most people reading this email are familiar with LLVM's >> code review process <http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#code-reviews> >> as well as LLVM Weekly, the

We are pleased to announce the first LLVM Cauldron, to be held on Thursday September 8th 2016 in Hebden Bridge, UK. This is the day before the GNU Tools Cauldron being held at the same venue, so we hope to take advantage of the high concentration of compiler enthusiasts and to encourage lots of cross-pollination between communities. This will be a one-day conference with a single talks track and

On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 11:07 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > +Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> who's taking some (shared?) > ownership of Phabricator these days. > > Mehdi - was Phab updated recently (such that we might've picked up new > semantics)? > No: I upgraded the hardware and the OS, but not Phab itself yet. I have a test

As many of you know, I have a growing series of patches for a RISC-V backend under/awaiting review <https://reviews.llvm.org/differential/?authors=asb&order=updated>, <http://github.com/lowrisc/riscv-llvm>. I'll be posting a larger status update on that work either later today or tomorrow, this RFC focuses on an issue that came up during review which I think may benefit from

On 18 August 2016 at 15:21, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 18 August 2016 at 14:32, Alex Bradbury <asb at asbradbury.org> wrote: >> Good question, I didn't mention buildbots in this RFC as from a quick >> look at http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders it didn't look like >> early-stage architecture ports tend to have one, and as you say

On 23 November 2017 at 09:38, Alex Bradbury <asb at lowrisc.org> wrote: > On 14 November 2017 at 16:03, Alex Bradbury <asb at lowrisc.org> wrote: >> Dear list, >> >> At the RISC-V BoF at the LLVM Dev Meeting and the longer working >> session the day after, those of us working on RISC-V with LLVM decided >> it would be worthwhile to schedule regular

> If llvm-admin is meant to be mailed in some circumstances, perhaps the > listinfo page should say something other than "DO NOT MAIL THIS > LIST!"? Yes, I saw that too. I presumed that it was okay to mail this list because I saw a suggestion in an older post[1] to send messages to it. But perhaps I'm wrong. [1]

On 18 August 2016 at 00:08, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 17 August 2016 at 10:14, Alex Bradbury via llvm-dev >> * Codegen >> * Compressed instruction set support (RVC) >> * Benchmarking and comparison to GCC RISC-V (and potentially other archs) > > What about buildbots? > > I'm assuming "check-all" would be enough for