Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Branch status for libunifex #435

Closed
ccotter opened this issue Jul 8, 2022 · 4 comments
Closed

Branch status for libunifex #435

ccotter opened this issue Jul 8, 2022 · 4 comments
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request question Further information is requested

Comments

@ccotter
Copy link
Contributor

ccotter commented Jul 8, 2022

I noticed most of the recent PRs to libunifex have landed on broken-stdlib rather than main. Is there a description of which features or bug fixes land where? Is there a plan to eventually merge the broken-stdlib branch into main, or something else? Thanks!

@AnujYamdagni
Copy link
Contributor

Hey @ccotter! Yes most of our recent commits have been in broken-stdlib but we’re currently formalizing a plan to merge unstable and broken-stdlib into main. Unfortunately there’s no ETA for the merge yet but stay tuned.

@janondrusek janondrusek added the question Further information is requested label Jul 14, 2022
@ccotter
Copy link
Contributor Author

ccotter commented Oct 5, 2022

@AnujYamdagni - i see the unstable branch recently merged into broken-stdlib. have you had a chance to move towards a plan on merging main and broken-stdlib?

By the way, if there's anything i can do to help, please let me know (although I can understand if this might be too involved for outside help). We've started using this library (based on the main branch) at my company, and I backported one algorithm (when_all_range + associated required utilities like unifex::optional) from the broken-stdlib branch in our local branch that's derived from the main branch here.

I'm generally interested in knowing the longer term plan for unifex (e.g., continued investment/support from Meta?) as we consider having other teams in my company look at onboarding this library. As other teams onboard things like coroutines, we'd like to have a solid foundation of a Sender/Receiver vocabulary and base algos, and unifex is a great candidate (one day we'd probably migrate to std::execution, if/when that is accepted into the standard library). If you'd be able to provide any color on that, please let me know!

@janondrusek
Copy link
Contributor

@ccotter Apologies for a late reply. Historically there have been 3 branches:

  1. main (highest bar for PR review)
  2. unstable (lower PR bar, incubator for main + scheduler affinity [WIP] task<> scheduler affinity #431 for unifex::task)
  3. broken-stdlib (absl:: polyfills for incomplete / incorrect std:: implementations on some older devices, internally used at Meta)

I merged unstable (now deleted) into broken-stdlib and Meta does not need the polyfills anymore. Here is a strategy for the next couple of weeks:

  1. tag current main, e.g. 1.0.0
  2. (in parallel) remove absl:: polyfills from broken-stdlib
  3. merge all the new algorithms from broken-stdlib into main and tag e.g. 1.1.0
  4. merge scheduler affinity into main
  5. delete broken-stdlib

@janondrusek janondrusek self-assigned this Jan 9, 2023
@janondrusek janondrusek added the enhancement New feature or request label Jan 9, 2023
@janondrusek
Copy link
Contributor

Both broken-stdlib and unstable are merged into main and deleted.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants