Hi,
We don't have a PR check for refleaks. I would like one.
The buildbots are far too slow and unreliable to provide a sensible way to
check for refleaks.
It is nigh impossible to pick out errors in a PR from flaky tests, flaky
machines and pre-existing errors.
Stopping refleaks at source wo
>
> > It is nigh impossible to pick out errors in a PR from flaky tests,
> flaky machines and pre-existing errors.
I agree with the sentiment but is certainly not that dramatic. We (people
watching the build bots) do it on a regular basis, and many contributors do
it very efficiently as well. I a
Is there a possible middle ground here? Rather than a required PR check (or a
full buildbot run), maybe we could just add a new “magic” label that runs a
single refleak job using the GitHub actions runners.
___
python-committers mailing list -- python-c
> Is there a possible middle ground here? Rather than a required PR check
(or a full buildbot run), maybe we could just add a new “magic” label that
runs a single refleak job using the GitHub actions runners.
That sounds like a good compromise and it will be strictly better than the
current setup.
Hi everyone,
We have a huge amount of buildbots failing and seems to be related to
different issues
that keep piling up. To prevent this from going worse,* I am blocking the
main branch*
*until these issues are resolved.*
Only release managers and the developer in residence will be able to merge
