public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Jelte Fennema-Nio <[email protected]>
To: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Ilia Evdokimov <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrei Lepikhov <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: a very significant fraction of the buildfarm is now pink
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2025 12:30:16 +0100
Message-ID: <CAGECzQRys8t8ig7eN26rbvop+zgw06oP11L5HpYuUtA=6j_WZA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+Tgmobec4-XiTZ0_VNf7G1znq3eJhjDL0c=3E1qkOXy4xtXxA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
<CA+TgmobfeePej0uNfbLy0v6jUrB3D9m1Kh+QQ40_-A9KQjkqUw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CA+TgmobVWYnYDj1HZ--iqeKx+n7zTgtYCar+YfZ0V6wiX-t0Mg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CA+TgmoYp1KvG=7L7SjiRjJrXT8kEfH10kSGp54FQd03v19OwvA@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+Tgmoaob_3aNF5S49WFoJs6Rb37rNnd5WH_e9nXAn_jtWWCLQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CA+TgmoZB8frH_n6tYAdFSYWUwy1wbVOzM3zHfVkHUKCj0+rHzA@mail.gmail.com>
<h5tjttxky4wlk4easqrcaqnvly74phwttvne6crk3lm4rdjbl5@uxu33v5mxjqx>
<CA+Tgmobec4-XiTZ0_VNf7G1znq3eJhjDL0c=3E1qkOXy4xtXxA@mail.gmail.com>
This was very painful to read. +1 on making changes. Both for a
culture change to require less urgency over the weekend if it's a
minor failure, and probably also a tooling change to make this less of
a problem in general.
On Sat, 22 Feb 2025 at 04:38, Robert Haas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 9:14 PM Andres Freund <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I'd also say that breaking CI and BF is probably something I'd consider more
> > urgent, as that could indicate the commit was just generally less well tested.
>
> This is possible, but I think we oversell it by quite a lot. It's
> quite possible for someone to put hundreds of hours into a patch and
> forget to check CI before pushing;
...snip...
> Twenty years ago, post-commit testing
> was probably the best you could hope for, but today it isn't.
100% agreed. As someone also working on other open source projects,
this reads incredibly foreign. This is a problem that simply cannot
happen in most projects I've worked on: GitHub will simply not allow
you to push to master/main if CI fails (at least not without an
explicit override). Postgres is the only project I work on where all
these things only run post-push to master.
To be clear, I'm not saying that we should be using GitHub for this,
although I personally think that would be a good idea given our CI is
triggered by pushes to GitHub. But it at least seems like one thing
that we need is a process change to make it less likely that people
accidentally push broken changes to master. e.g. We create a staging
repo (which could be on GitHub) and each committer has their own
branch (or branch prefix). Then when a committer pushes there, CI is
run and probably also some significant part of the build farm (and
maybe a committer could even opt in to running the full build farm).
If they pass, then the branch is automatically rebased on top of
master and pushed to the production repo its master branch.
view thread (38+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: a very significant fraction of the buildfarm is now pink
In-Reply-To: <CAGECzQRys8t8ig7eN26rbvop+zgw06oP11L5HpYuUtA=6j_WZA@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox