Re: [PATCH 8/8] ci: drop redundant linux-reftable job

From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Date: Oct 9, 2026, 05:55 UTC
Message-ID: <asiB25AareJgkKL5@pks.im>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqzewoys2h.fsf@gitster.g>

On Thu, Oct 08, 2026 at 11:18:14AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 26 quoted lines

> Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:
> 
> > The "linux-reftable" job exercises Git with reftables as its default
> > backend. But this job is arguably redundant because we already have the
> > "linux-reftable-leaks" job that exercises reftables with the leak
> > sanitizer enabled, and it is unlikely that we will catch any extra bugs
> > with the leak sanitizer disabled.
> >
> > Drop the job.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
> > ---
> >  .github/workflows/main.yml | 3 ---
> >  .gitlab-ci.yml             | 3 ---
> >  ci/run-build-and-tests.sh  | 2 +-
> >  3 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> As linux-reftable-leaks job uses NO_{CVS,SVN,PR}_TESTS in ci/lib.sh
> to disable tests on these foreign-scm interoperability tests, this
> change means reftable is no longer tested with them at all, no?
> 
> Not that I personally see specific value in testing git-p4 with both
> reftable and reffiles backend, the loss of coverage needs to be
> noted, if not justified, in the proposed commit log message.
> 
> Other than that, nice thinking.

Hm, that's something I missed indeed. I don't really think that those tests are all that important, and I'd rather have all of these tools removed from our code base anyway. But I find it hard to argue that we should just drop test coverage for them altogether.

So how about arguing the other way round and making the job more useful? We don't have good test coverage of reftables with SHA256, so we could adapt the job to exercise that combination.

Patrick