On Sat, 04 Jul 2026 at 21:25:18 +0200, Timo Röhling wrote:
* Otto Kekäläinen <[email protected]> [2026-06-29 13:27]:
If developers are not quick to fix or disable failing jobs
I find it really frustrating to see my CI turn red only to realize
that it's just a random pipeline failure such as [1].
This doesn't just apply to CI-runner infra failures like that one: it's
relatively frequent for Salsa-CI jobs to fail for reasons that have very
little to do with the package under test, like a regression in a
dependency or in the test tool (piuparts, Lintian, or similar), or a
limitation in the pipeline (for example jobs that can't succeed when
targeting experimental or backports, as a result of apt's default
pinning). The better the Salsa-CI pipeline coverage becomes, the more
often we'll have at least one job failing for a reason that isn't a bug
in the package under test.
Pushing commits to Salsa to disable the affected jobs, and then
re-enable them when the regression has been addressed, could easily
result in generating more CI runner load than leaving them failing (as
well as taking up more contributor time).
smcv
