Andreas Enge <[email protected]> writes: > Am Sat, Mar 14, 2026 at 08:54:43PM +0100 schrieb Sergio Pastor Pérez: >> I'm not sure we can maintain a close to 100% ratio. And with our current >> setup, is it possible to only push commits that do not break any >> packages? As far as I know, that requires the CI to do the building of >> all dependents, only after confirming that nothing breaks, the committer >> will be able to push it manually. The problem is on that "manual" part, >> commits need to be authenticated, which means that we cannot have a bot >> automatically making the commits. > > Right now I do not think we are there, but we already were closer when QA > vetted the pull requests, and the cuirass bot is also very useful. So I am > hopeful for the future! And I do not think that the manual committing > poses problems here. Theoretically an update of an input could break a > commit between the bot building the dependents and the human pushing, > but this will not happen all that often.
Even then, humans make mistakes, so it's quite possible to do an incorrect rebase to master or other kinds of errors. Marking commits that are known to be safe it's still a valuable metadata to have. If we can reach 100% we can mark only them, then it will be easier to pinpoint commits that are stable from the future, for example for using time-machine. Cheers, Sergio
