[LLVMdev] Open Source Contributions (was Re: Benchmarks)
ghost at cs.msu.su
Wed May 5 01:17:02 PDT 2004
Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Wed, 5 May 2004, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> > > Take 'arch' for example: its approach seems like it would solve almost
> > > all of the version control issues that we are facing, and supports
> > > decentralized development in particular. From what I understand, you
> > > would be able to do all of your development on your own "local" branch,
> > > others could have access to it, and when it's ready, we could pull it
> > > in as one big patch or set of changes.
> > There are a couple of problems. First, arch is not portable to Windows.
> > Are you really sure nobody will port ALVA (or parts of it) to that
> > platform?
> Arch was just one example. :) I'm not familiar with Alva, what is it
> (google isn't particularly helpful)?
Actually, that's ALVA is what my spellchecker made from LLVM :-(. I meant: if
LLVM is ported to Windows, then arch will become a problem.
> > Second, local repository is fine, but what if two persons ever decide to
> > work on the same branch?
> I believe that arch allows you to do this kind of thing:
Right, but you'd need HTTP/FTP server. Not a problem for *me*, but lots of
folks are behind firewalls and can't do that.
> ... but again, I haven't really spent the time to look into revision
> control systems in any detail.
More information about the llvm-dev