From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2026 15:11:14 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] ci: link failure and leak annotations to the test script
Message-ID: <c991fe7d-6230-4600-a038-b051993e0e2d@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHwyqnUO0zvr+hPT2t0CG-7D9vZuWBRdj1RjC356WEuXaZ9Faw@mail.gmail.com>

On 05/10/2026 14:59, Harald Nordgren wrote:
>>> Is this enough to call this a regression? Then maybe it's not worth
>>> doing this part at all.
>>
>> Yes, I think we should drop this patch. The first step to debugging a
>> test failure is to look at the test output, so the current behavior
>> where clicking on the links on the summary page takes you to the test
>> output is more useful than taking you to a diff that may not even show
>> the test that failed. The first patch is definitely worth keeping as it
>> makes it much easier to see the LSAN output.
> > I played with instead showing the file name (and line when available)
> as part of the annotation text, and leaving the linking as it is. I
> think it could gives us the best of both worlds:
> >      memory leak logged in t1060 (t1060-object-corruption.sh)
> > and
> >      failed: t1060.17 partial clone of corrupted repository
> (t1060-object-corruption.sh:141)
> > What do you think?

I guess having a bit more detail could be useful, I certainly don't object.

Thanks

Phillip