Matthew Pickering <[email protected]> writes: > I am against any proposed change which makes it easier to break the > build on any platform. Someone, usually Ben, has to waste a lot of > time fixing these breakages and if master does not build it affects > every developer. > Indeed, I agree with Matthew here. Breakages are very painful both when they happen and after when we need to bisect through them.
> If a commit breaks the build then it should prevent the patch being > merged. Now that CI is robust, this is a realistic goal. > > My preferred solution is to start using "marge-bot" which is battle > tested solution for this precise problem. We don't need to reinvent > our own solution. Hopefully the native support in gitlab will improve > over time but for now it is the highest impact change we can make > whilst maintaining the core principles of CI. > I would be fine with trying to deploy it. My thought was that it would be "only" a few months of manually working around the issue until an upstream solution arrived. However, I agree that this may be just long enough to justify deploying an interim solution. I can try this today if others agree this is a reasonable way forward. Cheers, - Ben
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
