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

Fix riscv64 for no-std #8770

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 10, 2024
Merged

Fix riscv64 for no-std #8770

merged 1 commit into from
Jun 10, 2024

Conversation

theoparis
Copy link
Contributor

See issue #8768

@theoparis theoparis requested a review from a team as a code owner June 10, 2024 23:25
@theoparis theoparis requested review from alexcrichton and removed request for a team June 10, 2024 23:25
Copy link
Member

@alexcrichton alexcrichton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for this!

@alexcrichton alexcrichton enabled auto-merge June 10, 2024 23:27
@alexcrichton alexcrichton added this pull request to the merge queue Jun 10, 2024
Merged via the queue into bytecodealliance:main with commit b7aacfc Jun 10, 2024
36 checks passed
@stlankes
Copy link

stlankes commented Jun 22, 2024

The latest release (22.0) is 2 days old and doesn't include this PR. Is this what is intended?

@cfallin
Copy link
Member

cfallin commented Jun 22, 2024

Is this what is intended?

Yes! Our release process is to branch the release branch on the 5th of each month, and let things be tested and bugs be discovered on main for at least two weeks (backporting fixes as needed) then release from that branch on the 20th. This ensures that every change and new feature has between two and six weeks of testing and fuzzing.

We didn't always do things this way but the procedure is from hard-earned experience where changes slipped in just before release have almost no testing and can cause problems. This PR should be included in the next release (23.0) on July 20.

You can see a bit more about the rationale in #3955.

@stlankes
Copy link

Sounds like a reasonable strategy!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants