Re: [Mesa-dev] [Intel-gfx] gitlab.fd.o financial situation and impact on services

From: Nicolas Dufresne <nicolas@ndufresne.ca>
To: "Michel Dänzer" <michel@daenzer.net>,
	"Discussion of the development of and with GStreamer"
	<gstreamer-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"Daniel Stone" <daniel@fooishbar.org>,
	"Erik Faye-Lund" <erik.faye-lund@collabora.com>
Cc: amd-gfx list <amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
	intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"X.Org development" <xorg-devel@lists.x.org>,
	dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	wayland <wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"X.Org Foundation Board" <board@foundation.x.org>,
	Xorg Members List <members@x.org>,
	Mesa Dev <mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [Mesa-dev] [Intel-gfx] gitlab.fd.o financial situation and impact on services
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2020 09:27:26 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <93d7158b1ab49e51d14d991d5bdb2dba38ad6025.camel@ndufresne.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9b0b31b8-7610-d5c5-790a-617178cc8c1e@daenzer.net>

Le dimanche 01 mars 2020 à 15:14 +0100, Michel Dänzer a écrit :
> On 2020-02-29 8:46 p.m., Nicolas Dufresne wrote:
> > Le samedi 29 février 2020 à 19:14 +0100, Timur Kristóf a écrit :
> > > 1. I think we should completely disable running the CI on MRs which are
> > > marked WIP. Speaking from personal experience, I usually make a lot of
> > > changes to my MRs before they are merged, so it is a waste of CI
> > > resources.
> 
> Interesting idea, do you want to create an MR implementing it?
> 
> 
> > In the mean time, you can help by taking the habit to use:
> > 
> >   git push -o ci.skip
> 
> That breaks Marge Bot.
> 
> 
> > Notably, we would like to get rid of the post merge CI, as in a rebase
> > flow like we have in GStreamer, it's a really minor risk.
> 
> That should be pretty easy, see Mesa and
> https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/ci/variables/predefined_variables.html.
> Something like this should work:
> 
>   rules:
>     - if: '$CI_PROJECT_NAMESPACE != "gstreamer"'
>       when: never
> 
> This is another interesting idea we could consider for Mesa as well. It
> would however require (mostly) banning direct pushes to the main repository.

We already have this policy in GStreamer group. We rely on maintainers
to make the right call though, as we have few cases in multi-repo usage
where pushing manually is the only way to reduce the breakage time
(e.g. when we undo a new API in development branch). (We have
implemented support so that CI is run across users repository with the
same branch name, so that allow doing CI with all the changes, but the
merge remains non-atomic.)

> 
> 
> > > 2. Maybe we could take this one step further and only allow the CI to
> > > be only triggered manually instead of automatically on every push.
> 
> That would again break Marge Bot.

Marge is just a software, we can update it to trigger CI on rebases, or
if the CI haven't been run. There was proposal to actually do that and
let marge trigger CI on merge from maintainers. Though, from my point
view, having a longer delay between submission and the author being
aware of CI breakage have some side effects. Authors are often less
available a week later, when someone review and try to merge, which
make merging patches a lot longer.

> 
> 

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel