[llvm-dev] GitHub Hooks

Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Jul 19 18:03:19 PDT 2016

> On Jul 19, 2016, at 6:00 PM, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 19 July 2016 at 17:54, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yep, I think the main benefit (so far) over just protected branches
>> would be that we can also guarantee sane timestamps on master,

What about linear history? Does not this require the "status checks”?


>> which
>> should mean we can reconstruct the llvm-project umbrella uniquely when
>> its script goes down or something else weird happens.
> Actually, now that I think about it, you wouldn't necessarily get a
> perfect *re*construction (the umbrella would be triggered by a push so
> could still have a different order if each push is picked up
> immediately and one commit-date lags).
> What you would get is a better (not perfect) guarantee of each
> umbrella commit having a sane state, after script downtime. That's
> seems less persuasive to me.
> Tim.

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list