From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4454AC433F5 for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 15:31:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231708AbiCJPcr (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Mar 2022 10:32:47 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46328 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229704AbiCJPcq (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Mar 2022 10:32:46 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-x635.google.com (mail-ej1-x635.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::635]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1869E15A228 for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 07:31:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ej1-x635.google.com with SMTP id bg10so12929553ejb.4 for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 07:31:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:references:user-agent:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GmQLRtgRVu/1xBBcQUVsQD2rdMqe/1C6tVt8ubFnn68=; b=N5vnde5dE8z4HFcPcbVZOwdenphVO9B8wBb0hCqAdO5EjmJ8hYDYlfD6O7hJA0sER6 ZeOrcxL7fKrL8wDaox2Grb9FGfkXtrjSVa7ZP8IBm57E59ZXrhNIw0PwWl9g1mzGtsox 7bO3N8H9duaDZx71h29D1iedADoMw3c/OBKEKPgpDIX9T8punmz7g4jUoyL4IAQlgpTw 2OjpDunhDtLYtQhOfH00VSbd28eFUQ2ck1MYsV61VjVr9+vZjuMWGCGNYHjb1FV9eCRp b7u1oOaYY1x0EsQh8+1DWqo6vYz+r2YLRfmLasUWaCRmqtX1Rd0yCSbngCQS0WpJToBU wJVw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:references:user-agent :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GmQLRtgRVu/1xBBcQUVsQD2rdMqe/1C6tVt8ubFnn68=; b=YxZdj+Dh44M4IGqXtTCPTXSm44Z/5tDMpkXbK91aZim+sOp3XabCPfp46lhjjWFP+/ 5YRR0qqWQZcjw0bYRYOXkhHgDPcQ1Ys7OHwuOIdA0PD4KvsOPWb3rW9Dgo5LyPB1sQ40 bjjtduD7m1Y537Rydohd4ZqcUAMJGY6CX1tr1ooG3EFXplee7FhuR0O3OavXvAsnve4p nT0HXAdn/Ibe/TI8NwJR8O+T30Jbz4jdY7a1SiONl0R3LiEYkGqQlzrPcESElkrSAjQ5 vD5VvVj2Zi7tSr4Bqpq6iWojACOpPLm43PrWlp3Xydbw9bWlMhyTGgtYx9vzD8p3mwcH GPSA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Lc4ePETjDWJOog6vzbIUvu+0HiMnCDQW2Z29D/XH1D0h3dtjG duISj8o2nCeUJ+3RBVHXCp8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwGoAp3vlOVPZu5RjUIfqo4bHh9RFfMnHfN/fS6QoD7AHj/4U4r7ADl8GboYYuIGD2N8LDbSg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:6d9f:b0:6db:62b6:f3d6 with SMTP id sb31-20020a1709076d9f00b006db62b6f3d6mr4903642ejc.366.1646926303348; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 07:31:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from gmgdl (j120189.upc-j.chello.nl. [24.132.120.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e19-20020a056402105300b004162d0b4cbbsm2150103edu.93.2022.03.10.07.31.42 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 10 Mar 2022 07:31:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from avar by gmgdl with local (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1nSKlR-000Yja-Uu; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 16:31:41 +0100 From: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org, Jacob Keller Subject: Re: win+VS environment has "cut" but not "paste"? Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2022 16:23:02 +0100 References: <220220.86bkz1d7hm.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> <220222.86tucr6kz5.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> <505afc19-25bd-7ccb-7fb2-26bcc9d47119@gmail.com> <220304.86mti6f4ny.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> User-agent: Debian GNU/Linux bookworm/sid; Emacs 27.1; mu4e 1.6.10 In-reply-to: Message-ID: <220310.86o82dj02q.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 09 2022, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi Junio, > > On Mon, 7 Mar 2022, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Johannes Schindelin writes: >> >> > I said that the current output is only useful to veterans. The output = that >> > hides the detailed log, under a separate job that is marked as >> > non-failing. >> > >> > That's still as true as when I said it. :-) >> >> I think getting rid of the separate "print failures" CI step and >> making it more discoverable how to reveal the details of failing >> test step is a usability improvement. > > I'm so glad you're saying that! I was starting to doubt whether my caring > about getting rid of that `print failures` step was maybe misguided. I don't think anyone's been maintaining that getting rid of it wouldn't be ideal. I for one have just been commenting on issues in the proposed implementation. I think we might still want to retain some such steps in the future, i.e. if we have a failure have subsequent steps that on failure() bump varying levels of verbosity / raw logs etc., or even try re-running the test in different ways (e.g. narrow it down with --run). But the failure step you see when something fails should ideally have the failure plus the relevant error, just as we do with compile errors. >> I am not =C3=86var, but I think what was questioned was the improvement >> justifies multi dozens of seconds extra waiting time, which is a >> usability dis-improvement. I do not have a good answer to that >> question. > > It is definitely worrisome that we have to pay such a price. And if there > was a good answer how to improve that (without sacrificing the > discoverability of the command trace corresponding to the test failure), I > would be more than just eager to hear it. Isn't the answer to that what I suggested in [1]; I.e. the performance problem being that we include N number of lines of the output that *didn't fail*, and that's what slows down showing the relevant output that *did* fail. I.e. if say t3070-wildmatch.sh fails in a couple of tests we'd show a *lot* of lines between the relevant failing tests, let's just elide the non-failing ones and show the output for the failing ones specifically. *Sometimes* (but very rarely) it's relevant to still look at the full output, since the failure might be due to an earlier silent failure in a previous test (or the state it left behind), but I think that's rare enough that the right thing to do is just to stick that in a subsequent "verbose dump" step or whatever. >> But new "non-veteran" users may not share that. That is something a >> bit worrying about the new UI. > > Indeed. My goal, after all, is to improve the experience of contributors, > not to make it harder. > > Still, given that you currently have to click quite a few times until you > get to where you need to be, I have my doubts that what this patch series > does is actually making things slower, measured in terms of the total time > from seeing a failed build to being able to diagnose the cause by > inspecting the command trace. Yes, but wouldn't the "Test Summary Report" in [1] be the best of both worlds[1] (with some minor changes to adapt it to the GitHub "grouping" output, perhaps)? Then you'd always see the specific of the failing test at the end, if you had N number of failures you might have a lot of output above that, but even that we could always tweak with some smart heuristic. I.e. show verbose "not ok" output if failures <10, if 10..100 elide some for the raw log, if >100 just print "this is completely screwed" or whatever :) 1. https://lore.kernel.org/git/220302.86mti87cj2.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com/