On Mon, 7 Feb 2022, Timothe Litt via curl-library wrote:

Maybe not precisely, but an approximation is possible.  See my response to Dan's note.  A real database can be kept.  A CI job's exit status can be captured, timestamped, and recorded.  PRs can be tagged with the CI job that found an issue. Then you can get found bugs found/job - and a time series.  That's a reasonable proxy for effectiveness.

Very few CI jobs turning red result in a new issue. They typically show that the PR in progress need furter attention. Usually ending up in a commit or two more getting added to the same branch, which then are squashed into the same single commit at the time of merge. The problem is then never present in the master branch.

Tags can also let you categorize bug types - e.g. memory leaks, buffer overflows, protocol errors...

That would be awesome indeed, and massive amount of work to setup. We don't even have the enbryo for such a setup now.

The CI jobs do their best work on PRs, and for those there are no "less frequently"

You can manually trigger once a week, or before a release, every 10th PR, or...  You can also script "manual" triggers.

Yes that is theoretically possible, and that would indeed make them run more seldomly. It then converts from from the effective CI jobs we have into the autobuild style we have had for a very long time. That's very ineffective because: 1. very few people watch the progress of them and 2. the original author of the commit already moved on in a lot of cases. That's why it is so important to test and verify as much as possible before the PR is accepting in the first place. That's when the incentive and motivation is still with the original author to keep polishing the work until no further flaws can be found.

If the protocol or platform that you fixed is the 199th job in the queue, you're waiting for feedback.  That's expensive too. Even if you do something else, you lose task switching time.  More intelligent scheduling helps.

Waiting 2-3 hours for the CI jobs to complete is usually not a problem anyway, as in a majority of cases they are still completed by the same a human has had the opportunity to review the proposed change. If waiting 2-3 hours is a problem for a contributor, then I think we have another problem than the CI setup.

--

 / daniel.haxx.se
 | Commercial curl support up to 24x7 is available!
 | Private help, bug fixes, support, ports, new features
 | https://curl.se/support.html
-- 
Unsubscribe: https://lists.haxx.se/listinfo/curl-library
Etiquette:   https://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html

Reply via email to