No idea, the checkout just timed out. I tried to play with sparse
checkouts, etc. and my current hypothesis that the large number of
revisions makes it unhappy.
On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 2:39 AM James Y Knight wrote:
>
> It'd be nice to know what about our repository is breaking it. Do they have
> a
It'd be nice to know what about our repository is breaking it. Do they have
any idea what that is?
For example -- I think that we probably will want to archive+discard many
of the random branches and tags currently in the repository. If the large
number of branches and tags is breaking it, then ma
Some status update wrt GitHub SVN bridge.
It does not work for any non-trivial (= LLVM) repo. I filled the issue
there, however, there is no ETA when it will be fixed. Even worse,
there are no promises that the issue will be addressed at all. Though
they are aware that this is the issue for us.
On
What's the status here?
Can someone keep https://llvm.org/docs/Proposals/GitHubMove.html updated
with the current status of things?
And once things are usable, probably update
https://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#for-developers-to-work-with-a-git-monorepo
as well.
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 4:
On 2018-10-24 08:25, Whisperity via cfe-dev wrote:
They are not shown in the project graph, but if you open the "branch"
drop down it has a tab named 'Tags'.
It shows some tags there, but not all of them. But clicking "releases"
then "Tags" will show this page [1], which seems to include all o
Apparently the GitHub UI is not great about showing tags. If you clone
and do git tag you'll see them. Someone at one of the dev. meeting
roundtables found a way to see them on GitHub but I don't remember the
details.
-David
Jacob Carlborg via llvm-dev writes:
> On 2018-
At this point, Tuesday is definitely not going to happen. I'll recreate the
prototype tomorrow to fix the issue you discovered, and aim for Thursday to
make it final unless more changes are needed.
But yes, the goal is to, very soon, declare the conversion is "final",
publish it at the official ur
James and Tom,
One question. Would the monorepo be fixed and would it not be re-created
after the day?
I am deeply cosmetic-checking the repo. For now, I haven't found critical
issues, though.
Takumi
On Sat, Oct 20, 2018 at 9:47 AM Tom Stellard via llvm-dev <
llvm-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
When I view monorepo, the google stable branch have the problem that always
delete all the contents, and then copy the stable branch.
May us skip those delte branch actions.
Refere to
```
SHA-1: 00353aa9741e8419a0ab140559fd6fdfaaac04af
* Updating branches/google/stable to r309660
llvm-svn=309869
