Re: Explicitly enable meson features in CI

From: Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Subject: Re: Explicitly enable meson features in CI
Date: 2025-07-11 11:00:31
Message-ID: CAN55FZ2mBojFyZd9i3S+V5sjEOjboMO36m0H3Vq8t3b7SHpuCQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025 at 20:12, Jacob Champion
<jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 2:59 AM Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Andres off-list mentioned that if we explicitly enable features for
> > *all* of the tasks, then none of the tasks will be testing the auto
> > feature option and I agree with Andres. My suggestion is setting
> > features to auto for Debian - Meson task. I decided on this because I
> > think it is the most checked CI task
>
> Hehe, that's certainly true for me...
>
> > so it would be easier to catch if
> > one of the features is disabled without anyone noticing.
>
> Seems reasonable. If we do this, can we rename the job with a "- Meson
> Auto" suffix or something, to try to call the difference out
> explicitly?

I think renaming it would be better but then we have two Linux tasks:

- Linux - Debian Bookworm - Autoconf
- Linux - Debian Bookworm - Meson Auto

For me it looks like 'Meson Auto' can be confused with 'Autoconf'. We
can rename it as a 'Meson Auto Feature Detection' but that is a bit
longer. Do you have any ideas? If you think 'Meson Auto' is good
enough, we can continue with it, too.

--
Regards,
Nazir Bilal Yavuz
Microsoft

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nikita Malakhov 2025-07-11 11:03:42 Re: Some ExecSeqScan optimizations
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2025-07-11 10:58:32 Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication