Re: Let's start using standard Salsa CI instead of custom Go team custom `test_the_archive` job
Hi!
On Tue, 9 Sept 2025 at 09:16, Shengjing Zhu <zhsj@debian.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 11:16 PM Otto Kekäläinen <otto@debian.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > On this list we have had several discussions about CI. Historically there has been a debian/gitlab-ci.yml that ran a custom Go `test_the_archive` job on a custom Go runner. As discussed on this list several times in past year, it does not seem to provide much value right now, as it does not fail even if the package itself is unbuildable.
> >
>
> Could you do better research before proposing changes? The two CI have
Please re-read the email thread "Golang team Salsa CI runner and
documentation" that started in September 2024 and thread "Should we
delete pkg-go-tools, provisioning, migrate-pkg-go-to-salsa etc?" that
started in May 2025.
There are also many discussions about `test_the_archive` having false
negatives and false positives in threads in past year when e.g. Glow,
GH and golang-golang-x-tools CI usage was discussed.
I would say that I have researched this topic extensively from both
technical and social (who is maintaining what) aspects, and I have
been one of the few people who actually have maintained and improved
these tools for the team in past year. If you think I need to do more
research, you should be specific in your request. Your response above
comes off a bit rude, not sure if that was you intent.
> different goals which I have explained in several emails. If people
> want to improve the CI, they could spend time fixing the
> test_the_archive job. If people want alternatives, now it has.
> Debusine can test the reverse deps, although in an inefficient way.
I have spent time documenting the test_the_archive job. If you want to
improve it, please do so. If it goes unmaintained for a long time and
has both false positives and false negatives, it is a fully valid
approach to replace a tool instead of doing new versions of it.
Debusine is good at doing mass builds and testing archive-wide effects
of package changes. Salsa CI is great for detecting regressions in
commits on individual packages. In those past email threads, we have
also discussed using Salsa CI for reverse dependency checking and the
polished version of that capability is likely to be merged as a
standard feature soon via
https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline/-/merge_requests/613.
Reply to: