Re: Enable CI on postgres/postgres github repo?

Hi,

On 2022-01-07 14:55:28 +0000, Dave Page wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 5, 2022 at 3:17 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> writes:
> > I'm kind of down on this actually. Either it will be a waste of cycles
> > because no one looks at the reports, or PG hackers will have to learn
> > to read and interpret a second source of build failure reports.

Due to cfbot we kind of have to anyway...

> > We have
> > a lot of accumulated knowledge about the buildfarm, plus ways to examine
> > past failures, none of which would exist here as far as I've gathered
> > from experience with the cfbot. (And the cfbot's reports definitely suck
> > in usability compared to the farm --- failures often omit critical logs,
> > and what there is is crammed into a single badly-formatted web page.)

It should be a bit better now. All *.log, *.diffs, regress_log* files are
preserved for 90 days for failing testruns. You can navigate to them at the
top of the page of a result.

It's still annoying to see the precise test that failed in a parallel
check-world invocation. But that's a much more general issue than just in CI
checks :(.

> > I guess the bottom line for me is "set it up if you want, but don't
> > expect me to pay any attention to it".

> OK, well from what I can tell, all the reports are delivered on the Cirrus
> or Github sites, so it'll take zero effort to ignore it :-)

I've wondered if it could make sense to forward those reports to the buildfarm
status page, via a dedicated animal. But it doesn't seem that important.

> I've enabled it for the postgres/postgres repo

Thanks!

> https://cirrus-ci.com/github/postgres/postgres/
>
> There's nothing to see there at the moment; I guess we need a commit to
> trigger a build.

Yep. Happened since: https://cirrus-ci.com/github/postgres/postgres, two
successful runs.

Greetings,

Andres Freund