[llvm-dev] [RFC] Move py-mlir-release to new top-level repo in the LLVM org

[Mehdi AMINI via llvm-dev]

Thanks for working on this Stella!

I'm wondering about the versioning: these packages that we'd publish
continuously are necessarily "unstable" to some extent. How do we handle
the versioning and the alignment with LLVM releases?

Otherwise I'm fine with a new repo for this, in particular since it
involves GitHub action and these can't be isolated (in terms of
notification and such) other than at the repository boundary.

For the LLVM releases, would we need to branch in this repo as well?

Thanks,

-- 
Mehdi


On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 10:56 AM Stella Laurenzo via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> Hi folks, I would like to propose that we create a new top-level repo in
> the LLVM organization for organizing the Python MLIR Releases (both daily
> and official numbered releases, whenever we are ready for such a thing) and
> corresponding pushes to package repositories, etc.
>
> I have prototyped such a release process in a personal repo:
> https://github.com/stellaraccident/mlir-py-release
>
> Additional development on that release process is currently blocked on
> more work on the shared library organization in LLVM (discussed here
> https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2021-January/147567.html and
> being worked on independently) but it is useful as is and a reasonable
> starting point for further work.
>
> I would propose that we just fork my current repo into a new one in the
> LLVM organization and then take the necessary steps to get
> credentials/permissions/secrets set up in the new context.
>
> Some answers to questions that may come up:
>
>    - *Why should this be a repo separate from llvm-project? *These kind
>    of automation repos tend to have a lot of "garbage" commits that I think is
>    best if they do not pollute the main repo (and also don't face contention
>    on automatic jobs bumping things, etc). They also tend to require special
>    permissions and secrets that we will want to more tightly control. They
>    also make use of other GitHub features that it seems like we would like not
>    polluting the main development flow ("Releases" tab, Actions, etc). Also,
>    this is the kind of thing that tends to get revised en-masse periodically,
>    and again, it would be good to not pollute the monorepo.
>    - *Why not land this in llvm-zorg? *llvm-zorg claims to be for "LLVM
>    Testing Infrastructure" and seems well scoped to that statement. What I am
>    managing above is periodic, automated release tooling based on open-source
>    CI systems (currently GitHub Actions), which are fairly standardized across
>    the Python releasing community, easy to set up, etc.
>    - *What ultimately will the code in this repo do?*
>       - Have periodic GitHub actions to select new LLVM revisions and
>       schedule daily/snapshot releases.
>       - Have manual actions for triggering official, numbered releases.
>       - Facilities for building Python wheels for PyPi and house any
>       additional metadata/automation needed for anaconda.
>       - Builds releases for all supported operating systems (currently
>       Linux/CentOS7/manylinux2014, MacOS, and Windows) and supported Python
>       versions (currently 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9).
>       - Publish release artifacts on the Releases tab for daily/snapshot
>       releases.
>       - Provide a stable reference point for downstream projects that
>       extend MLIR-Python and need to produce version-matched artifacts of their
>       own.
>    - *Could this graduate to be more than "MLIR" python?* Maybe. I chose
>    the name because that is what I am focused on and didn't want to grab too
>    much land. But there is nothing stopping this from becoming automation for
>    general LLVM monorepo+incubator Python releasing.
>    - *What if we don't do this?*
>       - *Option A:* We keep running this in a private repo with the
>       disclaimer that is currently at the top: "Note that this is a prototype of
>       a real MLIR release process being run by a member of the community. These
>       are not official releases of the LLVM Foundation in any way, and they are
>       likely only going to be useful to people actually working on LLVM/MLIR
>       until we get things productionized." We would miss opportunities for
>       convergence with other projects and would cause things to fragment.
>       - *Option B: *We only publish Python bindings in official LLVM
>       release packages, and only for the Python version they are built with. We
>       don't release Python binaries through normal package management channels.
>
> Opinions?
> - Stella
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20210107/0711b9b0/attachment-0001.html>