Re: Don't run Salsa CI in vain - a disabled CI is better than a persistently failing one

Otto Kekäläinen <[email protected]> Sat, 25 Jul 2026 12:42:06 +0300
Newsgroups gmane.linux.debian.devel.general
Message-ID <CAOU6tADx8eUzwNSyCWiOGpVGCR3wDH9bdvoKrM__kMt28B4Cjw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi,

> That's all nice, but when the CI config changes after setting it up
> and then breaks, we can't expect everybody to run around busily and
> disable newly failing or even newly appearing jobs.
...
> I'm not gonna spend time on fixing CI that used to work for
> something that I didn't break. At least not in the next 6 months.
> Contributor time is limited - such changes only waste it.

I am not asking people to "run around". I am simply asking that *if*
people use Salsa CI, they look at the CI result and make it green
before uploading to unstable. Otherwise the whole point of Salsa CI is
moot.

For the majority of regular packages hosted on Salsa, the CI triggers
and runs only when you push commits and are working on the package
already. There is nothing to "run around" for, you presumably are
already making changes to the package and can just "walk slowly" to
see why CI failed after your recent git commit.

It does happen that the CI starts failing due to an updated dependency
or changes in the CI itself. Some of those failures are real and you
should not ignore them. Unfortunately false positives also happen, and
we are working hard to ensure the CI pipeline itself is as stable as
possible as I explained in my previous message. Jochen already started
looking into the specific debrebuild issue you flagged as you saw in
his responses.

Based on your message I was expecting to see a CI history of
occasional passing runs and multiple regression/false positives that
frustrate you. However, when I browse
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/pdns-recursor/-/commits/debian/latest
all past 20 uploads have a failing CI, so it does not appear to me
that you are constantly fixing something that someone else keeps on
breaking - it just seems broken all the time. Salsa is currently
incredibly slow and I can't open the logs to see what the various CI
failure reasons this package has had in the past ~2 years, but I would
assume that for this package you probably should simply disable Salsa
CI for the time being.