Hi,
On 25-03-2022 22:36, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
I think you under estimate the complexity of the problem.
That may very well be. In that case it's even more important we have
this discussion, because I believe it's important that the Release Team
understands.
llvm defaults is probably goi
Le 25/03/2022 à 22:00, Paul Gevers a écrit :
> Hi Sylvestre,
>
> On 18-10-2021 22:42, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
>>> So, please share your plans with us.
>> My target is to have 2 versions for the next release. Realistically,
>> because of all the use
>> cases (ex: ghc), it is hard to have all packag
Hi Sylvestre,
On 18-10-2021 22:42, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
So, please share your plans with us.
My target is to have 2 versions for the next release. Realistically,
because of all the use
cases (ex: ghc), it is hard to have all packages focusing only one
version of llvm.
You recently added llv
Hello,
First, thanks for asking and I apologize for not communicating more on this.
Le 18/10/2021 à 20:40, Paul Gevers a écrit :
> Dear LLVM maintainers,
>
> As a Release Team member I'm wondering what your plan is with the
> different version of llvm-toolchain-* we have in unstable and testing.
Dear LLVM maintainers,
As a Release Team member I'm wondering what your plan is with the
different version of llvm-toolchain-* we have in unstable and testing.
Currently 4 versions in unstable [1], of which 2 are in testing (9 and
11) [2]. We have a transition bug open to track the removal of 9 [3
5 matches
Mail list logo
