[llvm-dev] Flang landing in the monorepo

[Stephen Scalpone via llvm-dev]

Hi Eric,

The LICENSE file in the f18 github repo reflects the new llvm licensing.  We expect to change the file headers to reflect the relicensing in the next few days.  The NVIDIA copyright will be removed.

- Steve

From: Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>
Date: Thursday, December 19, 2019 at 8:56 AM
To: Peter Waller <Peter.Waller at arm.com>, Chris Lattner <clattner at nondot.org>
Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov>, Stephen Scalpone <sscalpone at nvidia.com>, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Flang landing in the monorepo

Hi Peter,

At this point I'm very confused at the point of landing the code. Outside of the flang name there doesn't appear to be a single thing that says this is an llvm project. There's no evidence of llvm code or style guide review, no use of llvm APIs, or design similar to existing front ends. In addition, the license files also don't appear to match the current license of the project - this appears to be nvidia copyright (though under apache 2 as is correct as far as I can tell).

I'd be very curious in reading the minutes from the board session where this was discussed and what conditions were given for commit to the repository.

-eric

On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 7:34 AM Peter Waller <Peter.Waller at arm.com<mailto:Peter.Waller at arm.com>> wrote:
On 18/12/2019 21:49, Eric Christopher wrote:
> Yes, I looked through those sources and a number of my questions
> around which clang versions have been supported and directory
> structure. I think the only difference is removing the direct
> questions about earlier flang, but I still don't see code generation
> or uses of llvm libraries that would conform to "written in the style
> of LLVM and clang". Can you perhaps point me to where I'm missing
> these things?
I can't speak with authority on all of these issues.

In terms of clang versions, I understand that clang version 7 and 8 are
currently supported. We would expect it to work with newer LLVM
versions, and
the readme is currently out of date. The intent is that it will work
with all branches of LLVM and the community will build up CI to protect
this.

It's worth mentioning that merging flang in at this point does not
affect the existing LLVM build in any way. Patches to integrate the
build system are expected in the near future, and be subject to the
normal LLVM code review processes.

I understand that code generation is a work in progress and is expected
to start landing in the not too distant future. Other people (Steve
Scalpone, cc'd, and others) can perhaps speak to this more than me.

In terms of using LLVM ADTs, etc, I expect that once flang is part of
the monorepo, there will be a greater usage of those things.
> Chris's earlier acceptance aside I don't see any evidence of code
> review as part of that and so I'd expect we'd see more here.
Code review has been happening all along in the the f18 github repository:
https://github.com/flang-compiler/f18/pulls

I am operating on the assumption that the code will land with no
additional review by members of the LLVM community, and future code
review will happen with the same mechanisms that the wider LLVM project use.

Regards,

- Peter

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
confidential information.  Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution
is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by
reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20191219/2aada795/attachment-0001.html>