Re: [PATCH 0/9] ci: make Git's GitHub workflow output much more helpful
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Feb 26, 2022, 18:43 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqzgmd5uzu.fsf@gitster.g>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqv8x2dd7j.fsf@gitster.g>
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
Show 26 quoted lines
> Let me tell my experience: > > - Clicking on macos+clang in the map-looking thing, it did show and > scroll down automatically to show the last failure link ready to > be clicked after a few seconds, which was nice, but made me > scroll back to see the first failure, which could have been > better. > > - Clicking on win+VS test (2), the failed <test> part was > automatically opened, and a circle spinned for several dozens of > seconds to make me wait, but after that, nothing happened. It > was somewhat hard to know if I were expected to do something to > view the first error and when the UI is ready to let me do so, or > if I were just expected to wait a bit longer for it to all happen > automatically. > > Either case, the presentation to fold all the pieces that finished > successfully made it usable, as that saved human time to scan to > where failures are shown. > > I personally do not care about the initial latency when viewing the > output from CI run that may have happened a few dozens of minutes > ago (I do not sit in front of GitHub CI UI and wait until it > finishes). As long as it is made clear when I can start interacting > with it, I can just open the page and let it load while I am working > on something else.
FWIW, CI run on "seen" uses this series.
When I highlight a failure at CI, I often give a URL like this:
https://github.com/git/git/runs/5343133021?check_suite_focus=true#step:4:5520
I notice that this "hide by default" forces the recipient of the URL to click the line after the line with a red highlight before they can view the breakage.
For example, an URL to show a similar breakage from the old run (without this series) looks like this:
https://github.com/git/git/runs/5341052811?check_suite_focus=true#step:5:3968
This directly jumps to the error and the recipient of the URL does not have to do anything special, which I have been using as a convenient way to give developers a starting point.
I haven't compared the implementation of this one and Ævar's series that aims for a different goal, so I do not yet have an opinion on which one should come first (if we want to achieve both of what each of them wants to achieve, that is).
Thanks.