From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6038F1F4D7 for ; Thu, 26 May 2022 18:31:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=github.com header.i=@github.com header.b="KtrPdIoJ"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236835AbiEZSbf (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 May 2022 14:31:35 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36004 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1348900AbiEZSax (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 May 2022 14:30:53 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x62e.google.com (mail-pl1-x62e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8414F4BFDA for ; Thu, 26 May 2022 11:30:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x62e.google.com with SMTP id f18so2176528plg.0 for ; Thu, 26 May 2022 11:30:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=google; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :cc:references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=iqwpJrN0lC2Tsui/IlbyBiYQztNw6nfDjD/iKJhFh4Y=; b=KtrPdIoJG8OrFTVK/MwnRED0vN2JawuLhT7RB9OkWXkQ5kbs10hsAsE0W2JOuM81ms D/njllrc6MTqLi8PsM6X8lfWJO5ArZCEjlu4Rq0SaMIPybSz1455lilqwTMccg9oCaUP UDM1E8ml044m53XuGWlnrbQdPbqDxlWipfyghKQ7lJYRahq7l9QrE6JHlZ5iFd4MiHWW TV/z5V1erORnTqIxPjoWLP87xj5EnNCD6EtHe12LTEdNoblWNEYHvYiOc3JENSdy9L/w jCpihZfSMqNuOrSOWcAK3cnPUTDiSE+s3iGPQjIxoKvjL0bMW+uBevcpBvTZvoFfGPZX s42Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=iqwpJrN0lC2Tsui/IlbyBiYQztNw6nfDjD/iKJhFh4Y=; b=BG7dt1Y0I+L51BsDgR1Qu/gvySUGuSYRM1DrSBspKo2YIaBT8m6duX4MLjzo5aH/WN bHvaAPVfVsXdJfMiQLLZtK8joSWiUK1Ls/eWPj5sit/BpMALTM5ickjyuj/54ny5sbYJ SEv5ze4jsAdqB9pXyFihifn6ZS+5DTae20ZZ9prmtiyIk0HHXRxC3Lwp+qmvx5Mw+yCG 4DEbGNFDJ3ziyOJOTTaQPINF4P2N7wuRLTIo53/o7njEQeecRknz8dGbTG5NvtcfE7PR BTsOFMKCMkc5vBHQMdi99kniLC3o2xUcuhgloTJZ3p1/EO5CPhLUG1zeSP72HrnV8Xdn 0Ekw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53158Y276m2vLsfEwKuPebzyoELvio7Z+hBVzwgwY4AKT5OkPCVm eY4XV7rNSguiq1am9q+BbTzk X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyxRYxXGR5dE6OQtXlZmN8iErSddmXl6C5hoN/yE3RIIpGfSq56xrMwHGXUI8viZ0GKXPZ7yA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:f652:b0:156:701b:9a2a with SMTP id m18-20020a170902f65200b00156701b9a2amr39091982plg.14.1653589852019; Thu, 26 May 2022 11:30:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.104] (cpe-172-249-73-112.socal.res.rr.com. [172.249.73.112]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m5-20020a63f605000000b003faebbb772esm1872808pgh.25.2022.05.26.11.30.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 26 May 2022 11:30:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <8b57f907-3db1-9fe1-d582-e2d05acbe5ce@github.com> Date: Thu, 26 May 2022 11:30:49 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.8.1 Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (May 2022, #07; Wed, 25) Content-Language: en-US To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Derrick Stolee , Johannes Schindelin , =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsCBCamFybWFzb24=?= References: From: Victoria Dye In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano wrote: > Victoria Dye writes: > >>> * js/ci-github-workflow-markup (2022-05-21) 12 commits >>> - ci: call `finalize_test_case_output` a little later >>> - ci(github): mention where the full logs can be found >>> - ci: use `--github-workflow-markup` in the GitHub workflow >>> - ci(github): avoid printing test case preamble twice >>> - ci(github): skip the logs of the successful test cases >>> - ci: optionally mark up output in the GitHub workflow >>> - ci/run-build-and-tests: add some structure to the GitHub workflow output >>> - ci: make it easier to find failed tests' logs in the GitHub workflow >>> - ci/run-build-and-tests: take a more high-level view >>> - test(junit): avoid line feeds in XML attributes >>> - tests: refactor --write-junit-xml code >>> - ci: fix code style >>> >>> Update the GitHub workflow support to make it quicker to get to the >>> failing test. >>> >>> Will merge to 'next'? >>> source: >> >> The latest version of this nicely addressed the feedback I originally had, >> particularly in improving page loading time. It's still slower than before >> this series, but IMO it's manageable (especially taking into account the >> improved information accessibility). >> >> I don't see (or have) any other unaddressed concerns, so I'm in favor of >> moving it to 'next'. > > I see Ævar sent another reroll of "rebuild the base" and "then > rebase a (hopefully) equivalent of this series on top", but I think > it is unhealthy to keep doing that. Does the latest "rebuild the > base" part look unsalvageably and fundamentally bad that it is not > worth our time to consider joining forces to polish it sufficiently > and then build this on top? > My impression of 'ab/ci-setup-simplify' is that its core changes are either unrelated to, or at least not mutually exclusive with, the 'js/ci-github-workflow-markup' series. While Ævar has sent an example/RFC with one series rebased on top of the other, I don't see the two as inextricably linked, or even really comparable. Because of that, I don't think it would be fair to either series if we continued to hold up *both* because of different levels of consensus, review, etc. As for my thoughts on each series, I do still think 'js/ci-github-workflow-markup' is ready for 'next' (for the reasons I sent earlier). I think 'ab/ci-setup-simplify' needs more review - especially given its length and the variety of changes - to ensure it doesn't introduce regressions or hurt developer quality-of-life. I've personally had a difficult time making sense of the series enough to review it, so I can't confidently judge it one way or another myself. > If that is the case, then I am OK to merge this to 'next' to cast it > in stone, and then the let "rebuild the base" part once die, to be > reborn as many "tweak the way things work to (clarify|optimize) X" > follow-up topics. > I'm not sure 'ab/ci-setup-simplify' would need to "die", more that it would be adjusted to rebase on top of an updated 'next' (including 'js/ci-github-workflow-markup'). That said, a re-sent version focusing on its own optimizations/improvements (rather than a comparisons against an IMO largely unrelated series) would almost certainly benefit both the series and its readers. > Thanks.