similar to: BoF: Let’s move to GitHub!

> On Oct 13, 2016, at 1:23 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > > On 13 October 2016 at 20:45, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote: >> This is a point of contention and a concern that Chris voiced about the monorepo. It should be in the survey. > > A lot of concerns were voiced on the discussion, not all of them here. > >

> On Oct 13, 2016, at 11:56 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > > Hi Duncan, > > I don't understand your concerns. > > First, the choice between sub-modules and mono-repo has been put > forward as the only two choices because people felt that, if we let it > open, we'd have too many different implementation details and we'd >

I was under the impression that the (non-monorepo) separate LLVM and Clang git repos hosted at git.llvm.org would be maintained for a year after the transition to the mono repo. I don't recall where I got that impression from; probably from some of the many emails on the migration topic. I noticed today that updates to these repos ceased on October 22nd of last year following transition to

What's the status here? Can someone keep https://llvm.org/docs/Proposals/GitHubMove.html updated with the current status of things? And once things are usable, probably update https://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#for-developers-to-work-with-a-git-monorepo as well. On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 4:57 AM Jacob Carlborg via lldb-dev < lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On 2018-10-24

Hello, I was wondering what was the current expected practice for committing patches to LLVM now that the Git monorepo is here. I have commit access to SVN but when I try to land my patched through GitHub I get an error saying "Permission to llvm/llvm-project.git denied". Depending on the answer, the documentation might need to be slightly clarified: the getting started documents for

It'd be nice to know what about our repository is breaking it. Do they have any idea what that is? For example -- I think that we probably will want to archive+discard many of the random branches and tags currently in the repository. If the large number of branches and tags is breaking it, then maybe it just starts working after we do so. On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 3:53 PM Anton Korobeynikov

Isn’t the checkout a local operation that should not involved GitHub ? Did you mean the clone operation ? And about sparse-checkout, I though they require a full clone of the repository anyway. Is there a way to do a partial clone only ? Note: If you don’t need the whole history local, you may perform a swallow clone (using —depth 1). > Le 9 nov. 2018 à 01:02, Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev

My expectation was that they would continue to be fed from the updates to the svn repo. But again, I don't recall where I got that impression from. It may have been a bad assumption on my part. Tom. From: Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info> Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2020 12:36 PM To: Tom Honermann <thonerma at synopsys.com> Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org; Michael

Here's another question about the current status of this. It's close to two months after the official monorepo was supposed to be published. Can someone give an update? Is this on hold indefinitely? Are there concrete issues that people are working on and this will happen as soon as those are resolved? At the least, I'm assuming the "SVN will shut down 1 year from now"

Hello. I'm developing a LLVM based project and I'm using a fork of LLVM and Clang repos from https://github.com/llvm-mirror . The workflow was merging my work with release_XX branches from these repos, so now I have my commits interspersed with upstream ones. I'd be grateful for any advice on how should I move my work towards official git monorepo. I want to preserve my history, of

On 10/16/2019 07:31 AM, Roman Lebedev wrote: > +1, please. > > Also, putting a tag on the *first* commit in the repo, > and doing `git describe --match FIRST_COMMIT_TAG` will be *great*! > Do we need to add a tag or is `git rev-list --count HEAD` good enough? -Tom > Roman. > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 5:23 PM Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev > <llvm-dev at

+1. And put it in the email (subject?). While it’s possible to derive a count from a hash manually, better to have it in the email in the first place. You can’t rely on order-of-email-delivery to reflect order-of-commit. --paulr From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Shoaib Meenai via llvm-dev Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2019 1:42 AM To: tstellar at redhat.com;

On 10/11/2018 03:27 PM, James Y Knight via llvm-dev wrote: > TLDR: https://github.com/llvm-git-prototype/ exists as a read-only mirror of SVN, and is being updated continuously with a script running on an llvm-project AWS VM. > Hi James, What is the current status of the monorepo, have you resolved all the known issues with the history? Are there any other changes that need to be made

On 10/16/2019 12:02 PM, Roman Lebedev wrote: > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 9:55 PM Tom Stellard <tstellar at redhat.com> wrote: >> >> On 10/16/2019 07:31 AM, Roman Lebedev wrote: >>> +1, please. >>> >>> Also, putting a tag on the *first* commit in the repo, >>> and doing `git describe --match FIRST_COMMIT_TAG` will be *great*! >>>

Hi all In case anyone has a remote to the (unofficial) https://github.com/llvm-mirror, please note that all the repos are at least 8 days behind. There's no warning about it. The page still says it's "Updated every five minutes". Best Stefan -- https://flowcrypt.com/pub/stefan.graenitz at gmail.com

On 10/15/2019 09:44 PM, Mehdi AMINI wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 9:33 PM Tom Stellard <tstellar at redhat.com <mailto:tstellar at redhat.com>> wrote: > > On 10/15/2019 09:24 PM, Mehdi AMINI wrote: > > Hi Tom. > > > > One issue with this is that we don't have a clear "ordering" from linear revision numbers from

On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 4:04 PM NAKAMURA Takumi <geek4civic at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, David. > > On Sat, Nov 17, 2018 at 7:46 AM David Jones via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> Hi James, >> >> I've started working with the prototype layout in context of Google's >> internal infrastructure. With deep apologies, I

Folks, Next Thursday evening (20 July) we''ll be holding a "Xen Users BOF" at the Ottawa Linux Symposium. >From the BOF description: "The Xen Users'' BOF will provide an interactive forum for users to talk about their experiences with Xen and highlight some of the cool configurations they have created with it. This will also be an opportunity for newcomers to

Folks, Next Thursday evening (20 July) we''ll be holding a "Xen Users BOF" at the Ottawa Linux Symposium. >From the BOF description: "The Xen Users'' BOF will provide an interactive forum for users to talk about their experiences with Xen and highlight some of the cool configurations they have created with it. This will also be an opportunity for newcomers to

Hey folks, Do we have proposals for an HPC focused BoF at EuroLLVM? I'd like to discuss the current efforts around integrating Polly, parallel IR efforts and vectoriser support in VPlan (like outer loop), as well as coordination on the next steps around Flang. -- cheers, --renato