similar to: Switching to git (Windows experience) (was re:[cfe-dev] GitHub anyone?)

Sourcetree is pretty good on windows, and I hear ok things about Git Extensions. I have not used the GitHub app though. I typically use Sourcetree to view the logs, and command line for everything else. From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Craig, Ben via llvm-dev Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 10:01 AM To: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org Subject: Re: [llvm-dev]

One of the things that may taint my prior analysis... At the time I was last evaluating Windows git GUIs, I was looking for something that would make handling .patch and .diff files easier. In particular, if a patch didn't apply, I really wanted to get some visual indication of which hunk failed, and some interface to resolve the conflict. I didn't find any tools that handled that

>On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 6:31 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: >> I think we should start two other threads: one about git tooling on Windows >> and one about infrastructure problems migrating to git. > >Some developers on Windows prefer to use GUI tools like TortoiseSVN to >command line tools for version control. The last time I tried

IMO, if we're switching to git, we should just be clear up front that all committers will be expected to switch to git as well -- or at least, if they want to use something else (e.g. mercurial's git bridge/etc), that it's their own problem. It is truly NOT that big an imposition to require the use of git. And knowing how to use git at at least a basic level is an important skill for

On 31 May 2016 at 21:24, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com> wrote: > Are we sure that github's svn integration works with common tools on > Windows, like TortoiseSVN? That's a good question. Can you try them out and report back? cheers, --renato

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 5:29 AM, Renato Golin via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 3 June 2016 at 10:03, George Rimar via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> +1. I am also bit concerned here. Never used git, but it is fine, I am ready to learn, >> but now when I am using TortoiseSVN the only command line I am using is for creating the

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Renato Golin via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Folks, > > There has been some discussion on IRC about SVN hosting and the perils > of doing it ourselves. The consensus on the current discussion was > that moving to a Git-only solution would have some disvantages, but > many advantages. Furthermore, not hosting our own repos

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 31 May 2016 at 21:24, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com> wrote: >> Are we sure that github's svn integration works with common tools on >> Windows, like TortoiseSVN? > > That's a good question. Can you try them out and report back? >From my very simple testing,

On 6/3/2016 9:31 AM, David Chisnall via llvm-dev wrote: > On 3 Jun 2016, at 15:01, Aaron Ballman via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> The end result is "go use the console". Whether that's because people >> recommend it or because it's the only option is immaterial. The fact >> remains, we don't have to do that today, we may have to

>On 3 June 2016 at 10:03, George Rimar via llvm-dev ><llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> +1. I am also bit concerned here. Never used git, but it is fine, I am ready to learn, >> but now when I am using TortoiseSVN the only command line I am using is for creating the >> final patch (though I think that is also available in GUI). >> And what I heard in this

On 1 June 2016 at 19:36, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com> wrote: > Despite people's reservations of a git-only repository? Hi Aaron, not at all! I was especially vague on my first email to make sure SVN folks would be shoved on the side, but John had asked for a full plan *in the case we move*, and I was just completing the picture. Having said that, I can't take that

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 04:24:08PM -0400, Aaron Ballman via cfe-dev wrote: > On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Renato Golin via cfe-dev > <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Folks, > > > > There has been some discussion on IRC about SVN hosting and the perils > > of doing it ourselves. The consensus on the current discussion was > > that moving to a

I think this issue is that we were not using the INTERCEPTOR macros to define these functions. The following patch seems to work for me to get the build linking again, however, I cannot test -- when I run check-asan, I get: 2> lit.py: lit.common.cfg:59: fatal: Invalid llvm_tools_dir config attribute: 'E:/llvm/2013/$(Configuration)/bin' ~Aaron On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Aaron

http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=21241 ? 2014-10-23 10:18 GMT-07:00 Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com>: > On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Timur Iskhodzhanov <timurrrr at google.com> wrote: >>> Yes it is. >>> Are you doing a Debug or Release build?

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Timur Iskhodzhanov <timurrrr at google.com> wrote: > I don't think this is the right approach. > > Currently we intentionally define malloc etc without changing the > names and (when stuff works ok) the linker just links all the mem > allocator calls with calls to our RTL. This is kind of a link-time > interception. How could that work

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Timur Iskhodzhanov <timurrrr at google.com> wrote: > 2014-10-23 11:34 GMT-07:00 Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com>: >> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Timur Iskhodzhanov <timurrrr at google.com> wrote: >>> I don't think this is the right approach. >>> >>> Currently we intentionally define malloc etc

> -----Original Message----- > From: aaron.ballman at gmail.com [mailto:aaron.ballman at gmail.com] On Behalf > Of Aaron Ballman > Sent: Friday, July 29, 2016 2:19 PM > To: Zachary Turner > Cc: Sean Silva; Robinson, Paul; Piotr Padlewski; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Upgrading to MSVC 2015 > > There are not that many people making commits to

Folks, There has been some discussion on IRC about SVN hosting and the perils of doing it ourselves. The consensus on the current discussion was that moving to a Git-only solution would have some disvantages, but many advantages. Furthermore, not hosting our own repos would save us a lot of headaches, admin costs and timed out connections. TL;DR: GitHub + git submodules [1] could replace all the

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Timur Iskhodzhanov <timurrrr at google.com> wrote: > Yes it is. > Are you doing a Debug or Release build? > Using ninja? Release build, cmake + MSVC (not using ninja). Perhaps I have it configured stupidly; I have it as an out-of-tree folder, did: E:\llvm\crt_build>cmake -DLLVM_CONFIG_PATH=E:\llvm\2013\Debug\bin -G "Visual Studio 12"

compiler-rt libs must be built with /MT, so the MSVS build is doing the wrong thing here. 2014-10-23 12:52 GMT-07:00 Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com>: > On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com> wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 2:57