On Tuesday, February 4, 2025 at 7:51:19 PM UTC+9 tobia...@gmx.de wrote:
> I suggest to make the checks information only; the check report failed
step, but the check itself passes always.
I don't think this is a good idea. If some tests fail randomly, then that's
an issue with the test and not
> I suggest to make the checks information only; the check report failed
step, but the check itself passes always.
I don't think this is a good idea. If some tests fail randomly, then that's
an issue with the test and not with the "engine". Just fix the test or, if
that's too much work for now
The basic idea is not to fail a CI check if the PR branch is not the cause.
Currently,
(1) "Build & Test / test-long" sometimes fails.
(2) It occurs frequently that one of "Build & Test using Conda(Meson) /
Conda" checks fails.
(1) is unfortunate, but this is our main engine checking the PR
Do you also want to disable CI workflows that sometimes fail for intrinsic
reasons? For example, the Build & Test workflow often fails to push the
temporary Docker image that it builds (eg
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/actions/runs/13036220999/job/36367766912).
No. Just CI workflows that
+1 on disabling all doctests that randomly fail.
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/39100 might be helpful in discovering
these flaky tests.
Do you also want to disable CI workflows that sometimes fail for intrinsic
reasons? For example, the Build & Test workflow often fails to push the
tem
On Friday, January 31, 2025 at 2:44:39 AM UTC+9 dim...@gmail.com wrote:
You can just check whether CI failures are relevant to your branch,
and if not, write so in comments.
I think we should adopt a policy that promptly (no excuse) disable any CI
check that fails due to reasons unrelated to
You can just check whether CI failures are relevant to your branch,
and if not, write so in comments.
On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 11:35 AM Jackson Walters
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm attempting to finish two pull requests:
>
> https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/38455
> https://github.com/sagemath/sa
Hello,
I'm attempting to finish two pull requests:
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/38455
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/39200
They do depend on one another in that 38455 requires extend=true from
39200. However, right now both PRs seem to be passing all the major "build
and test" CI
