ChuanqiXu marked an inline comment as done. ChuanqiXu added a comment. In D137534#4055286 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137534#4055286>, @h-vetinari wrote:
> In D137534#4055283 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137534#4055283>, @ChuanqiXu > wrote: > >> @h-vetinari said it should be OK to backport these patches to branched 16.x. > > That should be considered a comment from the peanut gallery, not a definite > statement. What I had said in https://reviews.llvm.org/D137058 was: > >>> [...] but I am not sure if we can land them in time. I guess it may be >>> possible to backport these patches to 16.x since it is relatively important? >> >> Might make sense tagging the release managers if things get tight - perhaps >> it's possible. E.g. ranges for LLVM 15 was also finished after the branch. Sorry for the misleading and thanks for the quick clarification. So it looks like the status quo is a little bit worse than I imaged... CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D137534/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D137534 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
