Summary:
Capture the current agreed-upon toolchain update policy based on the following
discussions:
- LLVM dev meeting 2018 BoF "Migrating to C++14, and beyond!"
llvm.org/devmtg/2018-10/talk-abstracts.html#bof3
- A Short Policy Proposal Regarding Host Compilers
lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-May/123238.html
- Using C++14 code in LLVM (2018)
lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-May/123182.html
- Using C++14 code in LLVM (2017)
lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-October/118673.html
- Using C++14 code in LLVM (2016)
lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-October/105483.html
- Document and Enforce new Host Compiler Policy
llvm.org/D47073
- Require GCC 5.1 and LLVM 3.5 at a minimum
llvm.org/D46723
Subscribers: jkorous, dexonsmith, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56819
llvm-svn: 351765
all missed!
Thanks to Alex Bradbury for pointing this out, and the fact that I never
added the intended `legacy` anchor to the developer policy. Add that
anchor too. With hope, this will cause the links to all resolve
successfully.
llvm-svn: 351731
This installs the new developer policy and moves all of the license
files across all LLVM projects in the monorepo to the new license
structure. The remaining projects will be moved independently.
Note that I've left odd formatting and other idiosyncracies of the
legacy license structure text alone to make the diff easier to read.
Critically, note that we do not in any case *remove* the old license
notice or terms, as that remains necessary until we finish the
relicensing process.
I've updated a few license files that refer to the LLVM license to
instead simply refer generically to whatever license the LLVM project is
under, basically trying to minimize confusion.
This is really the culmination of so many people. Chris led the
community discussions, drafted the policy update and organized the
multi-year string of meeting between lawyers across the community to
figure out the strategy. Numerous lawyers at companies in the community
spent their time figuring out initial answers, and then the Foundation's
lawyer Heather Meeker has done *so* much to help refine and get us ready
here. I could keep going on, but I just want to make sure everyone
realizes what a huge community effort this has been from the begining.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56897
llvm-svn: 351631
official Git repository.
Remove the directions for using git-svn, and demote the prominence of
the svn instructions.
Also, fix a few other issues while I'm in there:
* Mention LLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS more.
* Getting started doesn't need to mention test-suite, but should
mention clang and the other projects.
* Remove mentions of "configure", since that's long gone.
I've also adjusted a few other mentions of svn to point to github, but
have not done so comprehensively.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D56654
llvm-svn: 351130
Clarify that you should not introduce trailing whitespace when making a commit and that you should not remove trailing whitespace that's unrelated to code you are changing or are about to change. Then clarified the developer policy around what is considered an obvious whitespace commit.
llvm-svn: 339455
Making explicit our current policy to accept new targets as experimental and
later official. Every new target should follow these rules to be added,
and kept relevant in the upstream tree.
llvm-svn: 278971
Successive versions of LLVM should retain the ability to parse bitcode
generated by old releases of the compiler. This adds a bitcode format
compatibility test, which is intended to provide good (albeit not
entirely exhaustive) coverage of the current LangRef.
This also includes compatibility tests for LLVM 3.6. After every 3.X.0
release, the compatibility.ll file from the 3.X branch should be copied
to compatibility-3.X.ll on trunk, and the 3.X.0 release used to generate
a corresponding bitcode file.
Patch by Vedant Kumar!
llvm-svn: 243779
After much bike shed discussions, we seem to agree to a few loose
but relevant guidelines on how to prepare a commit message. It also
points the attribution section to the new commit messages section
to deduplicate information.
llvm-svn: 232334
Some references to llvm-gcc were so crusty that I wasn't sure how to
proceed and so I've left them intact.
I also slipped in a quick peephole fix to use a :doc: link instead of
raw HTML link.
llvm-svn: 201619
Before we learned about :doc:, we used :ref: and put a dummy link at the
top of each page. Don't do that anymore.
This fixes PR14891 as a special case.
llvm-svn: 172162
hopefully make it more visible. Adjust the web-docs to have a link to
this file rather than the list itself. I described code owners as also
being gatekeepers for their part of the code, which I think is true but
isn't in the code owner explanation on the web page.
llvm-svn: 160776
Tom Stellard