<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Jun 22, 2016, at 4:31 AM, Robinson, Paul via cfe-dev <<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org" class="">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" class="">Hm. Intriguing. Then each release would have to specify (somehow) what its specific IR compatibility range is.<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" class="">Release 47 supports bitcode back to release 3.9 (say), release 54 compatible back to release 44, etc where the "back to" number is not clearly predictable.<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" class="">(This would be easier to implement if bitcode reliably had a produced-by-version number in it.)</span></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div><div>It has since 3.8.</div><div>I added a record that contains it as a string (we use internally to reject bitcode that we know are incompatible during LTO for example).</div><div>Right now, there Is not code upstream that using this field for anything else than a diagnostic when the bitcode can’t be read, but it could be extended in the future.</div></div><div><br class=""></div><div>— </div><div>Mehdi</div><div><br class=""></div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" class=""><o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" class="">--paulr<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><a name="_MailEndCompose" class=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></span></a></div><div style="border-style: none none none solid; border-left-color: blue; border-left-width: 1.5pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 4pt;" class=""><div class=""><div style="border-style: solid none none; border-top-color: rgb(181, 196, 223); border-top-width: 1pt; padding: 3pt 0in 0in;" class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><b class=""><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Tahoma, sans-serif;" class="">From:</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Tahoma, sans-serif;" class=""><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>llvm-dev [<a href="mailto:llvm-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;" class="">mailto:llvm-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org</a>]<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><b class="">On Behalf Of<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></b>Chris Lattner via llvm-dev<br class=""><b class="">Sent:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Tuesday, June 21, 2016 9:29 PM<br class=""><b class="">To:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Chandler Carruth<br class=""><b class="">Cc:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;" class="">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>;<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="mailto:llvm-dev-request@lists.llvm.org" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;" class="">llvm-dev-request@lists.llvm.org</a>; Vikram Adve<br class=""><b class="">Subject:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Re: [llvm-dev] What version comes after 3.9? (Was: [3.9 Release] Release plan and call for testers)<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div></div></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">On Jun 20, 2016, at 11:38 PM, Chandler Carruth <<a href="mailto:chandlerc@gmail.com" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline;" class="">chandlerc@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div class=""><blockquote style="margin-top: 5pt; margin-bottom: 5pt;" class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">> Now you’re making the versions sound like floating point numbers :-). Just to be clear, you are proposing we use 3.10/3.11/etc. rather than 4.0/4.1/etc.?<o:p class=""></o:p></div><div class=""><div class=""><div class=""><blockquote style="border-style: none none none solid; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1pt; padding: 0in 0in 0in 6pt; margin-left: 4.8pt; margin-right: 0in;" class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class="">No, I’m suggesting that we continue the progression we’ve had from the start and proceed from 3.8 to 3.9 to 4.0 to 4.1.<o:p class=""></o:p></div></blockquote><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">I'm sympathetic to the idea that we should move to a sliding window for IR compatibility if that's useful.<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">However, I think it is a really big mistake to *have* a major version and just increment it arbitrarily without any associated "major" change. Lacking us explaining what we consider to be a major release, people will make assumptions that will inevitably lead to missed expectations.<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">If we want to have a major/minor split, I think we need to have *some* guidance for what will constitute a major jump. I don't think it needs to necessarily be formulaic (like bitcode compatibility), it could be when a feature happens to be ready and happens to be decided by the community to be "big enough" we flip the major version and announce that feature happened to be ready. But we shouldn't just go from 3.9 to 4.0 because of some decimal correspondence. Too many people will assume it had significance and become disappointed.<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">If we *don't* want a major/minor split, then I believe Richard's suggestion is the correct one: just have integers to mark the temporal releases, and dot releases for updates to that release branch.<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">I personally don't have strong feelings about whether we should or shouldn't have a major/minor split. I see arguments on both sides. But I really do not want us to have a *meaningless* split.<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">I can see your point about our current naming scheme being confusable with semantic versioning, but I don't think the risk is high and I don’t think the problem is solving. That is just MHO of course, and I totally respect and understand that reasonable people would disagree with that.<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">What I care most about is aligning our versioning scheme with the practical realities of how we manage the software, and giving our users some idea of what we ship. I do not think it is reasonable at all to go to “3.10” after “3.9”, because we will never get to “4.0”. The GCC community has been through this (as one example) where they could never decide on when to bump to 5.0. They resolved the issue by going to the completely insane (again, IMVHO :-) version scheme they have now.<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">The desire to align the version with how we release the product is what leads me to think that the only rationale solution is to increment the version number predictably with every release: we have a time based release. I don’t care if that is by adding 0.1 or by adding 1.<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">That is why I suggested that - if you believe that consistently adding 0.1 is confusing - then the logical answer is to jump to "version 40” with the post-3.9 major release and then add 1 on every other release after that. Here are the advantages I see:<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""> - This communicates clearly and obviously to users that we changed policy with the version number scheme<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""> - Offers continuity with the prior approach (3.9 -> 40 is something that people will be able to remember)<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""> - Aligns the new version number scheme with how the project is managed<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""> - Aligns the version numbers with the expectations of semantic versioning (since every release of LLVM is API breaking). Compatible bugfix/patch releases can then be “dot” releases of the major number, again aligning with semantic versioning.<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">The only downside I see to this is that people will think that it is crazy that LLVM has had so many incompatible releases, but hey, why hide the truth? :-)<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><o:p class=""> </o:p></div></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">-Chris<o:p class=""></o:p></div></div></div></div><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">_______________________________________________</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">cfe-dev mailing list</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class="">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><a href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev" style="color: purple; text-decoration: underline; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class="">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev</a><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></body></html>