nikic wrote: Yes, this will not be merged, because the LLVM 22 release cycle has closed and there will be no further releases. This is not a value judgement on the importance of this issue, just a consequence of the release cycle. For issues found after the upstream release goes EOL, backporting at the distro level is indeed the right thing to do. In Fedora we usually accumulate a handful of additional backports after upstream EOL (for LLVM in general -- I can't recall an instance of us having to backport a libclc patch.)
We probably should consider slightly extending the release cycle, to better bridge the gap between two releases. I believe the last time this happened was in https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-distribute-patch-releases-over-lifecycle-of-an-llvm-version/80955, which extended the maintenance window by 6 weeks. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/207264 _______________________________________________ llvm-branch-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
