Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: OSS - Swift Package - Ubuntu 14.04 (master) #230

Disabled the test on linux https://github.com/apple/swift-integration-tests/pull/17 > On 09-Feb-2017, at 4:48 PM, no-re...@swift.org wrote: > > [FAILURE] oss-swift-package-linux-ubuntu-14_04 [#230] > > Build URL: > https://ci.swift.org/job/oss-swift-package-linux-ubuntu-14_04/230/ >

[swift-dev] Changes to LLDB Branch Management

Hello Swift-Dev and Swift-LLDB-Dev, Over the last couple weeks we’ve been working on some changes to the branch management strategy for the Swift-LLDB repository. The goal is to have LLDB more closely align with the other projects forked from LLVM.org . We believe that making

Re: [swift-dev] Changes to LLDB Branch Management

Does this mean patches for LLDB-Swift will have to go through Phabricator instead of Github? ~Robert Widmann > On Feb 9, 2017, at 1:50 PM, Chris Bieneman via swift-dev > wrote: > > Hello Swift-Dev and Swift-LLDB-Dev, > > Over the last couple weeks we’ve been working on some changes to the br

Re: [swift-dev] Changes to LLDB Branch Management

That somewhat depends. If the patch is relating to swift support, it should go through GitHub. If the patch is more general to LLDB we are encouraging contributions to LLVM.org , which would be Phabricator (reviews.llvm.org ). This is the same policy

Re: [swift-dev] [swift-lldb-dev] Changes to LLDB Branch Management

Hi, Chris. I’m a bit confused by these changes. Swift’s master-next isn’t paired with upstream-with-swift; it’s paired with stable-next, which is resync’d to upstream-with-swift on a fairly regular cadence. Have you discussed this with the “merge czars” on the Swift side, who maintain master-nex

Re: [swift-dev] [swift-lldb-dev] Changes to LLDB Branch Management

> On Feb 9, 2017, at 12:09 PM, Jordan Rose via swift-dev > wrote: > > Hi, Chris. I’m a bit confused by these changes. Swift’s master-next isn’t > paired with upstream-with-swift; it’s paired with stable-next, which is > resync’d to upstream-with-swift on a fairly regular cadence. Have you >

Re: [swift-dev] [swift-lldb-dev] Changes to LLDB Branch Management

> On Feb 9, 2017, at 13:43, Chris Bieneman wrote: > > >> On Feb 9, 2017, at 12:09 PM, Jordan Rose via swift-dev > > wrote: >> >> Hi, Chris. I’m a bit confused by these changes. Swift’s master-next isn’t >> paired with upstream-with-swift; it’s paired with stable-ne

Re: [swift-dev] [swift-lldb-dev] Changes to LLDB Branch Management

> On Feb 9, 2017, at 1:59 PM, Jordan Rose wrote: > >> >> On Feb 9, 2017, at 13:43, Chris Bieneman > > wrote: >> >> >>> On Feb 9, 2017, at 12:09 PM, Jordan Rose via swift-dev >> > wrote: >>> >>> Hi, Chris. I’m a bit confused by these changes

Re: [swift-dev] [swift-lldb-dev] Changes to LLDB Branch Management

> On Feb 9, 2017, at 1:43 PM, Chris Bieneman via swift-dev > wrote: > >> >> On Feb 9, 2017, at 12:09 PM, Jordan Rose via swift-dev > > wrote: >> >> Hi, Chris. I’m a bit confused by these changes. Swift’s master-next isn’t >> paired with upstream-with-swift; it’s p

Re: [swift-dev] proposed change for master-next merges

Since the feedback on this was all positive, we’re moving ahead with this change. It seems like a good time for a status update. Some changes are already done: * We test up a test bot to build against the upstream-with-swift branches of LLVM/Clang (https://ci.swift.org/view/swift-master-next/j

[swift-dev] Summary of outstanding compiler crashers

This may or may not be practically useful to anyone, but I've collected a summary of the currently outstanding compiler crashers, somewhat categorized: https://gist.github.com/jtbandes/95ebf031d0ae4890d4dc3dc79e2bb4fa Slava has additionally offered, on Twitter, > 28482 root cause is a name look