+1 to extend the merge script to add a label in the commit message. BTW, I feel the current CI skipping strategy might be overaggressive, for example, branch-4.x doesn’t run CI, and it has been broken for a few days. If we adopt this proposal, do we have some CI bandwidth to enable CI for branch-4.x?
Thanks, Cheng Pan > On Jul 29, 2026, at 14:33, Wenchen Fan <[email protected]> wrote: > > It's hard to ask committers to manually edit the git message. Shall we > introduce a PR label, and the merge script can adjust the commit message if > it sees the PR label? > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 9:30 AM Tian Gao via dev <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> https://github.com/apache/spark/actions/metrics/usage >> >> I believe this is accessible to everyone. The ASF github action worker >> policy is at https://infra.apache.org/github-actions-policy.html >> >> On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 5:37 PM Nicholas Chammas <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> > On Jul 28, 2026, at 3:26 PM, Tian Gao via dev <[email protected] >>> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> > >>> > We've been struggling with our CI usage. With significant recent effort >>> > from the community, we have managed to keep usage barely under the limit >>> > (though sometimes slightly over). >>> >>> Is there some place we can see a report on our usage vs. the ASF limit? Do >>> we have a basic analysis of where the CI time is being spent, broken down >>> by job and step? >>> >>> I don’t have a opinion on the git trailer (mainly because it’s a decision >>> for committers only), but as a contributor who has recently spent a good >>> chunk of time studying our CI infrastructure, I have wondered about where >>> our usage is all going. >>> >>> Nick >>>
