[cfe-dev] Bugzilla Component for CUDA Bugs in Clang

[Chandler Carruth via cfe-dev]

Er, I see both Justin's response, and you saying "Done"?

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 12:26 PM Tanya Lattner via cfe-dev <
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> I did not see a response to this. Please let me know if I missed it.
>
> -Tanya
>
> On Feb 8, 2016, at 11:52 PM, Tanya Lattner <tanyalattner at llvm.org> wrote:
>
> CUDA component under what Product?
>
> I’ll also need below. However, I can use the defaults for the product you
> put it under for default assignee and cc list if you don’t have someone.
> Usually its a dummy assignee and the llvmbugs list.
> Component Description:
> Default Assignee:
> Default CC List:
>
>
>
>
> -Tanya
>
> On Feb 8, 2016, at 10:54 AM, Justin Lebar <jlebar at google.com> wrote:
>
> +Tanya, Anton, who may be able to effect this.
>
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Justin Lebar via cfe-dev" <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> To: "Reid Kleckner" <rnk at google.com>
> Cc: "cfe-dev" <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> Sent: Friday, February 5, 2016 2:58:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] Bugzilla Component for CUDA Bugs in Clang
>
> I'd vote for a new CUDA component.
>
>
> I guess this would let us watch the CUDA component for new bugs,
> which
> scales better than hoping that people cc the right people.  I'm
> onboard with that.
>
>
> Yes, please add a new component. We've been bad about this, historically,
> but that's no excuse to not be better going forward.
>
> -Hal
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:56 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com>
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:17 PM, Jingyue Wu via cfe-dev
> <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Justin Lebar <jlebar at google.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> I was about to +1 this, but then I looked through the existing
> list of
> components, and it doesn't seem that there are components for
> other
> similarly-sized projects, like OpenMP or whatever.  So maybe we
> can
> just get by with putting "CUDA" in the summary?  Bugzilla search
> sucks, but even it can handle this.  :)
>
>
>
> Actually, OpenMP is a separate "product" in the Bugzilla, even
> more
> high-level than "component".
>
>
>
> Right, but it also covers the runtime implementation.
>
> What do you think?
>
>
>
> I am fine with squeezing CUDA bugs in C++. I was just confused
> when I
> searched through the list and didn't find a place for CUDA bugs.
> Maybe
> rename "C++" to "C++/CUDA"?
>
>
>
> I'd vote for a new CUDA component.
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
>
> --
> Hal Finkel
> Assistant Computational Scientist
> Leadership Computing Facility
> Argonne National Laboratory
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20160226/15f1d3df/attachment.html>