[llvm] r193350 - Reverting my r193344 checkin due to build breakage.
kyrtzidis at apple.com
Thu Oct 24 11:25:39 PDT 2013
On Oct 24, 2013, at 10:52 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Argyrios Kyrtzidis <kyrtzidis at apple.com> wrote:
> It looks like the failure was in clang-tools-extra (http://clang.llvm.org/docs/ClangTools.html).
> IMHO, since this is not in the clang repository, it is unreasonable to have the phase1 bots tied to that and expect everyone to build and update it after making changes.
> Michael, what do you think ? I think we should have a bot building clang-tools-extra, but I don't think it belongs in phase 1.
> I don't care very much whether its in phase 1, but I think it is really, really important that developers making an API change are expected to update code in that tree.
> When changing an LLVM API, we routinely ask people to update Clang, DragonEgg, etc. This shouldn't be any different.
Asking people to update clang-tools-extra is fine, that's why I believe there should be a buildbot building it, but phase 1 is the highest priority, any breaking window should be at a minimum; phase 1 should build the code that everyone committing changes is building, not include repositories that are out of the core repositories.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cfe-commits