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
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 |