[llvm-dev] LLVM Incubator + new projects draft (original) (raw)

Philip Reames via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Wed Jul 1 10:11:15 PDT 2020

This looks to be a reasonable starting point.

A couple of nit picks, none are blockers.

  1. I'd hold off on handing out the sub-domain for the moment. This feels more official than we probably want for a random incubator.  I reserve the right to change my mind here, but maybe we should delay this part until we see what actual incubators look like?  As an alternative, maybe have a common incubator.llvm.org page which links to the docs defining the process and lists all active incubators with links to docs in their own repo?
  2. The must/should terminology should probably be factored out once and referenced.  As written, it takes a little effort to be sure the definitions are the same between the two uses.
  3. I'm not sure I agree with the no-code standard.  I agree with minimal code, but I think an incubator should be established enough to be discussed concretely (e.g. "what is" vs "ideals").
  4. As I mentioned before, I'd advocate for the notion of a sponsor (an existing LLVM contributor) for each incubator.  I'd have that a must on the incubator list.

Philip

On 6/30/20 8:29 PM, Mehdi AMINI via llvm-dev wrote:

Looks like a good proposal to me as-is! Thanks for putting this together to both of you :)

-- Mehdi

On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 1:49 PM Chris Lattner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: Hah, whoops, sorry about that.  This is the correct link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ss4jGHywL0Y2KWl4LqTo5CgJxx3i04-FkbXiPQMus/edit -Chris On Jun 30, 2020, at 1:41 PM, Thomas Lively <tlively at google.com_ _<mailto:tlively at google.com>> wrote:

Hi Chris, I'm also seeing an access denied error on the first link you shared, and although I can access the second document, it doesn't look like the document you meant to share. It looks like a one pager on ML in Swift. Thomas On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 1:05 PM Chris Lattner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:

On Jun 30, 2020, at 11:52 AM, Roman Lebedev <lebedev.ri at gmail.com <mailto:lebedev.ri at gmail.com>> wrote: On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 9:44 PM Chris Lattner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: The idea of adding an “incubation” stage to projects in the LLVM world seems to be positively received.  I also noticed that we don’t really document the new project policy in general in the LLVM Developer Policy.  To help with both of these Stella and I worked together to draft up a new section for the LLVM developer policy (incorporating the existing “New Targets” section). Ahead of proposing a Phabricator patch, we put it into this google doc, I’d love to get feedback on it from anyone who is interested in this: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ss4jGHywL0Y2KWl4LqTo5CgJxx3i04-FkbXiPQMus/edit Currently it doesn't open, "You need access", sanity check: is viewing allowed for everybody? It says that “anyone on the internet is allowed to comment”, maybe this link will work better?: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lC7cOJ2Iiqdx62o81J5YP7RzFHi8k2Rkt0zla-Kh6no/edit?usp=sharing In any case, if google docs isn’t cooperating, then you can check it out when it gets to Phabricator. -Chris

LLVM Developers mailing list llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev

LLVM Developers mailing list llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev

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/20200701/2e962a22/attachment.html>

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list