[llvm-dev] [PROPOSAL] Add Bazel Build Configuration to the LLVM Monorepo

[Chris Tetreault via llvm-dev]

Congratulations Geoffrey and everyone else involved on getting this done! It was a long journey, but we set a lot of important legal precedent so hopefully similar issues go more smoothly in the future.

From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Chris Bieneman via llvm-dev
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2021 9:22 AM
To: LLVM Dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Subject: [EXT] Re: [llvm-dev] [PROPOSAL] Add Bazel Build Configuration to the LLVM Monorepo

Hello LLVM-Dev,

Last week the review managers met to discuss this proposal. I've updated the proposal document with a summary of the meeting. You can find the proposal online here<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-www/blob/main/proposals/LP0002-BazelBuildConfiguration.md>.

The TL;DR is that the review managers agreed the proposal should be approved.

Thank you everyone who participated in the conversations around this proposal, and especially Geoffrey for putting the proposal together and shepherding it along.

-Chris


On Feb 19, 2021, at 1:46 PM, Geoffrey Martin-Noble <gcmn at google.com<mailto:gcmn at google.com>> wrote:

A reminder that the review period for this ends 2021-02-23, this coming Tuesday. Rest assured that if you expressed opinions in the previous RFC threads then review managers will also consider those points when discussing. We're not going to skip some point just because it wasn't posted in the correct thread :-D

Best,
Geoffrey

On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 3:44 AM Renato Golin <rengolin at gmail.com<mailto:rengolin at gmail.com>> wrote:
On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 at 21:00, Geoffrey Martin-Noble <gcmn at google.com<mailto:gcmn at google.com>> wrote:
To expand a bit on Eric's response, the intent here is *not* to make Bazel a supported build system for LLVM or to replace CMake (which I believe the proposal makes clear), but rather to enable Bazel usage and shared configuration for people and projects that already use it. I do not expect that Bazel will cover all the use cases currently supported by LLVM CMake any time soon (ever?).I don't work on Bazel itself, so have no insight on the support plan for those architectures. Only developers interested in working with Bazel would be expected to use or update the configuration, so lack of support for specific architectures should not affect things, I think.

My views exactly. Bazel will not be a "supported" build system and doesn't need to build on all platforms and environments LLVM builds. It should only concern people that actually use Bazel and be completely transparent to the rest who don't.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20210315/04aa5bc9/attachment-0001.html>