[cfe-dev] clang 3.5 branching and clang-openmp merge

[Nico Weber]

On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Jack Howarth <
howarth.mailing.lists at gmail.com> wrote:

> Nico,
>     A simple review of cfe-commits mailing list archive for the past
> couple of months shows that Alexey Bataev has been regularly committing
> sections of the clang-omp merge so it really isn't true to say that nothing
> has landed in trunk yet.
>

Oh sure, anything that was committed by yesterday is part of 3.5. I think
Bill understood your question as "We landed this bit of code very recently
that we'd like to merge", but from what I understand it's more "there's a
largeish chunk of code in some upstream repo". I don't think Bill meant to
say that all that unmerged code should just be merged to 3.5 :-)


> It is unfortunate that the clang-omp changes were never submitted as a
> complete series of patches on the mailing list so only the clang-omp
> developers have a good sense of what remains to be committed from their
> tree.
>          Jack
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Nico Weber <thakis at chromium.org> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Bill Wendling <isanbard at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Jack,
>>>
>>> Please go ahead and merge those changes into the 3.5 release.
>>
>>
>> They aren't landed yet on trunk, as far as I understand.
>>
>>
>>> There’s still time before we close the branches to non-bug fix changes.
>>>
>>> -bw
>>>
>>> On Jul 22, 2014, at 9:25 AM, Jack Howarth <
>>> howarth.mailing.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >      Is the merge of the clang-omp changes being abandoned for the 3.5
>>> release or will these additional changes to trunk also be allowed into the
>>> clang 3.5 branch? If official clang 3.5 release is left with only a partial
>>> merge of these changes, it would seem to require upstream to pause and
>>> rebase their clang-omp tree on clang 3.5 instead of the current clang 3.4
>>> (to allow for a stable release of clang-omp to be available based on clang
>>> 3.5).
>>>
>>
>> This is probably correct, yes.
>>
>>
>>> >              Jack
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > cfe-dev mailing list
>>> > cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
>>> > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cfe-dev mailing list
>>> cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20140722/5d3f7b60/attachment.html>