[Release-testers] [llvm-dev] RFC: Release process changes
John McCall via Release-testers
release-testers at lists.llvm.org
Tue May 26 16:09:45 PDT 2020
On 26 May 2020, at 18:24, Tom Stellard wrote:
> On 05/21/2020 05:54 PM, John McCall wrote:
>> On 21 May 2020, at 14:59, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev wrote:
>>> I would like to propose a few changes to the LLVM release process.
>>> current process is documented here:
>>> There are two parts to this proposal. The first is a list of
>>> which are things we are currently doing that aren't documented. The
>>> is a list of changes which would actually modify how releases are
>>> *** Proposed Clarifications ***
>>> ** Release manager is allowed to commit changes to the release
>>> branch without
>>> code owner approval. However, the release manager is encouraged
>>> to consult
>>> with code owners or patch reviewers for non-trivial changes.
>>> It's not practical to get code owner approval every time. Either
>>> because there
>>> is no code owner or because the number of backports is too high
>>> (e.g. pre-rc1 / pre-rc2).
>>> This proposed clarification matches how releases are currently
>> If this is how things are currently managed, it’s hard to argue
>> against it,
>> but I do think that — independently — we should make a stronger
>> effort to
>> ensure that we have active code owners covering the entire codebase.
>> My sense is that the ownership problem is deepest in two specific
>> of the project: compiler-rt and LLVM itself. Do you agree?
> There are usually less backports for compiler-rt, so that hasn't been
> an issue for me, but I do agree that LLVM itself could use more code
More information about the Release-testers