Quoting Jason Ekstrand (2018-12-19 08:07:23) > On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 2:51 AM Juan A. Suarez Romero <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-12-17 at 19:51 +0100, Bas Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 6:33 PM Juan A. Suarez Romero > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 10:21 +0000, Eric Engestrom wrote: > > > > Cc: Emil Velikov <[email protected]> > > > > Cc: Andres Gomez <[email protected]> > > > > Cc: Juan A. Suarez Romero <[email protected]> > > > > Cc: Dylan Baker <[email protected]> > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom <[email protected]> > > > > --- > > > > This patch depends on the releasing procedure in docs/releasing.html > to > > > > be updated to not rely on autotools anymore. > > > > > > > > I think our release managers (cc'ed) should work together and figure > out > > > > the procedure they want to go by; only once that's done can we > delete > > > > these 200+ files and 14k+ lines :) > > > > > > I'll let others to talk. But my preference would be to land this for > next 19.0 > > > branchpoint, just a couple of days before the branchpoint, so 19.0.x > releases > > > get rid of autotools. > > > > > > This way we have time to fix any remaining issue, and make like easier > for those > > > in charge of 18.3.x releases, which I think should support autotools > until the > > > end of its life. > > > > Can I suggest the inverse, pushing this long before any branchpoint? > > > > As with any migration, users only start using when you force them too, > > and that means a bunch of non-working usecases are going to be > > detected once this patch is pushed and some more people are forced to > > it. Sure, the last call discussion served to tease some of these out, > > but I expect even more will turn up if you submit this. > > > > The bad part is that this make life more complex for the person in charge > of the > stable release, because it means that any patch that touches the build > system > will only touch the meson, but not the autotools, which means either the > original author or the release manager should fix the part of the > autotools > in > order to avoid breaking it. > > > How common is it to have build system patches back-ported to stable? I > genuinely don't know but I would suspect it's not all that frequent of a > thing.
For meson it happens fairly regularly, it happens for android as well, for Scons and autotools it does happen but not often. It's starting to happen now more than it did before as there are at least a couple of drivers where the developer(s) all use meson primarily, and only touch test autotools at best. I suspect that will get worse as time goes by. Dylan
signature.asc
Description: signature
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
