Skip to content

Remove 'vectorizers' label from PR labeler #67810

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 29, 2023

Conversation

Endilll
Copy link
Contributor

@Endilll Endilll commented Sep 29, 2023

It's subsumed by an order of magnitude more popular vectorization label that is applied for the same path patterns.

Statistics (issues and PRs together):
vectorization: 91 open, 91 closed
vectorizers: 8 open, 5 closed

All vectorizers usages has occurred in just the past 2 weeks, and likely by our bot.

It's subsumed by an order of magnitude more popular 'vectorization' label that is applied for the same path patterns.
@Endilll Endilll added the infrastructure Bugs about LLVM infrastructure label Sep 29, 2023
@Endilll
Copy link
Contributor Author

Endilll commented Sep 29, 2023

For the reference, here are patterns for vectorization label:

vectorization:
- llvm/lib/Transforms/Vectorize/**/*
- llvm/include/llvm/Transforms/Vectorize/**/*

Copy link
Contributor

@cor3ntin cor3ntin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you remove the duplicated label in GitHub and make sure all the existing issues use the same label?

@Endilll
Copy link
Contributor Author

Endilll commented Sep 29, 2023

Yes, I've been waiting to do such clean-up after this is merged, to ensure there are no leftovers.

@Endilll Endilll merged commit 18b597b into llvm:main Sep 29, 2023
@Endilll Endilll deleted the remove_vectorizers_label branch September 29, 2023 15:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
infrastructure Bugs about LLVM infrastructure
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants