[llvm-dev] IMPORTANT: LLVM Bugzilla migration

[James Henderson via llvm-dev]

Okay, but it's quite possible people missed things on their first pass
(myself included, since I thought I at least reviewed the document).

Is there a technical reason these can't be added/changed now before
migration?

On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 at 08:42, Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info>
wrote:

> Hello James,
>
> > Could we please make all the existing tools components in bugzillas into
> their own labels, rather than some arbitrary distinction between them
> (assuming that the tool still exists in LLVM at least)? For instance, the
> following tools don't have their own label, but really should:
> >
> > 1) llvm-cxxfilt (corresponds to the llvm-c++filt component): should be
> tools:llvm-cxxfilt.
> > 2) llvm-mca: should be tools:llvm-mca.
> We do have the label mapping document that was created and agreed
> during one of the roundtables and reviewed further by the community.
> The mapping labels were created according to that document.
>
> > Also, I noticed a few of these tools:*** labels merged tool names, which
> is fine, since the tools in question are closely related. However, in some
> cases, the names are both prefixed with "llvm-" (e.g.
> "tools:llvm-ar/llvm-ranlib") and in others they aren't (e.g.
> "tools:llvm-objcopy/strip"). Could we please make sure all such instances
> are standardised to one form or the other (I don't care that much which,
> but have a slight preference for both having the "llvm-" prefix)?
> Thanks for the comments. The changes in label names / representation
> could be done post-migration as necessary.
>
>
> --
> With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
> Department of Statistical Modelling, Saint Petersburg State University
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20211124/ea4a2b2e/attachment-0001.html>