> That makes it fragile, and that’s why I disagree with your “90% done” > assessment. > What if the service behing the hook is down for a few days?
In the long-term view, a pretty trivial catch-up script ought to be able to synthesize a sane history after any amount of down-time. People could even run it locally for their bisecting needs if it was that important to them. In the short term, I don't think it's a critical enough service to worry about, frankly. What we already have is hopelessly fragile: right now when LLVM's server plays up it takes out absolutely everything, in the proposed world it would take out this bisecting convenience feature. Seems like a strict improvement to me. > Who will maintain it? I'm not the best scripter and I'd be happy to cede to someone else, but I'd be willing if it meant we could make progress. Tim. _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
