On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 11:57 AM Jelte Fennema-Nio <postg...@jeltef.nl> wrote: > On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 at 00:38, Peter Geoghegan <p...@bowt.ie> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 4:33 PM Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > This looks fantastic. Thanks so much for working on it! And all the > > > other usability improvements too. > > > > +1. > > Thanks all, I'm also very happy that it's deployed.
Now that we have CI information in an interactive webapp, do you think it would make sense to offer ways to control it a bit? [ ] Enable optional NetBSD task [ ] Enable optional OpenBSD task [ ] Enable optional Windows + MinGW task [ ] Request fresh CI run Until we have the new proper API endpoint up and running, perhaps we could include hidden comments on the page the cfbot scrapes to synchronise its submission list... The last one would affect cfbot's scheduling choices, ie do this one next please, and could be cleared as soon as a new CI result arrives. I suppose the other ones could cause cfbot to add "ci-os-also:" annotations to its commit message, like the existing "ci-os-only:", except not exclusive. You probably know if a patch has portability implications and want to turn those on, but I assume they are still too slow and expensive to enable by default.
