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-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A320D1F9FD for ; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 19:22:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232334AbhBWTVp (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Feb 2021 14:21:45 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:55051 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233978AbhBWTUP (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Feb 2021 14:20:15 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3EB995099; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 14:19:26 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=9TbWsH6YEy43jgsBSmiBbWqrgbE=; b=aKqUez XUzXqC/MOOb7r2e0m4XhzClpZmG35T9+lO3QKigWJAEa8Rq6gNT/qxVypaaQS+TE /ZYlK884LFLzxXXxZ6O5HiWGKgpO8oUPIJkzEUAmvLlctULia8I2j5oCww/7YagJ b4OkmbsiCwe/WbSme7EemQ72vAobXMyd4o9nQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=kIHZ5exyBdwzywbtOCRZpiRsLtVVqiEw 58bgt6SBnvXQHxkBZ9oX2X8vle+BUakTXKsKxiIeY6ejqd4hk+R1O0lTsS+075mG KQaNCUNigeahPEuQHIdK2smDnf1PGRENC/mIbIQzpj7dat/7Nk+tFCl8K/O7RPcn ZQU65TjaWEs= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4F7895098; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 14:19:26 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BA0B195097; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 14:19:25 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/6] Makefile: build "$(FUZZ_OBJS)" in CI, not under "all" References: <20210201111715.10200-1-avarab@gmail.com> <20210223114132.24345-7-avarab@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2021 11:19:25 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Jeff King's message of "Tue, 23 Feb 2021 13:28:54 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 0ACC0780-760C-11EB-9DD9-D152C8D8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > If you do a refactor, you are still on the hook for breaking the fuzz > objects because CI will fail (and you have to investigate it, and fix it > for CI to remain a useful tool). But instead of finding out about the > problem quickly as you're working, instead you push up what you think is > a finished result, and then from minutes to hours later you get a > notification telling you that oops, you missed a spot. I find that the > shorter the error-fix-compile cycle is, the less time I waste waiting or > context-switching. Thanks for writing this down so clearly.