Re: Heads Up: cirrus-ci is shutting down June 1st
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2026-04-17T21:48:04Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 02:50:53PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> This patch removes six lines of code and adds none. There are four >> messages on the thread. We've done 14 complete CI runs. That might be >> an extreme example, but I just don't know if repeatedly running CI on >> small patches that aren't being actively updated is really what we >> want to be doing. > Yes, starting with a low threshold should have little impact. I > suspect that we could take it slow, say by testing much less patches > that have a max of N lines touched (20~50?), and shave in resource > usage. This would not change much how useful the information provided > is. I think running a test promptly after a new patch submission is useful, even for small patches. I agree that the periodic re-tests for bit-rot could be scaled back a lot. regards, tom lane
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
ci: Add GitHub Actions based CI
- 9c126063b19a 19 (unreleased) landed
-
ci: Remove support for cirrus-ci based CI
- 68c8a365d4dc 19 (unreleased) landed