Re: [patch] remove cilk-plus

[Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini@oracle.com>]

Hi,

On 01/12/2017 16:43, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 12/01/2017 03:28 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 16/11/2017 16:33, Koval, Julia wrote:
>>> // I failed to send patch itself, it is too big even in gzipped form.
>>> What is the right way to send such big patches?
>>>
>>> Hi, this patch removes cilkplus. Ok for trunk?
>> Now that cilkplus is gone I suppose we should clean-up Bugzilla about
>> that. Shall I go ahead and essentially close all the bugs we got? As
>> WONTFIX or what else? Let's agree on something. In principle we could
>> keep the regressions for the sake of the existing release branches but I
>> think we got very, very, few of those and anyway I don't see who gonna
>> work on that...
> Not sure if we have a policy in this space or not.
>
> If we don't then my vote would be for CLOSE/WONTFIX now.  That seems to
> most accurately reflect state -- we're not going to be fixing any Cilk+
> stuff on the trunk or in the release branches.
Excellent, thanks Jeff. Thus, barring strong contrary opinions, I'll 
take care of that over the we.

Cheers,
Paolo.