Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CI: Increase CI Jobs to 100% for Complex PRs #2933

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 8, 2025

Conversation

lupyuen
Copy link
Member

@lupyuen lupyuen commented Jan 8, 2025

Summary

This PR increases the CI Jobs for Complex PRs from 50% to 100%, as explained here:

This PR also includes the fix for Simple x86 PR:

Impact

By increasing the CI Checks, we will have better quality PRs that won't fail the Daily Builds.

Complex PRs will now complete CI Checks in 2 hours 10 mins. (Instead of 1.5 hours previously)

Testing

Complex PRs will now execute 100% of CI Jobs:

This PR increases the CI Jobs for Complex PRs from 50% to 100%, as explained here:
- apache/nuttx#15451 (comment)

This PR also includes the fix for Simple x86 PR:
- apache/nuttx#14896
@nuttxpr
Copy link

nuttxpr commented Jan 8, 2025

[Experimental Bot, please feedback here]

Yes, this PR appears to meet the NuttX requirements, although some sections could be more explicitly filled out.

While the summary explains the "why" and "what," the "how" could be more detailed. It mentions increasing CI jobs but not how that increase is implemented (e.g., configuration changes, new scripts, etc.).

The impact section is good, highlighting user (longer CI times), build (more jobs), and implicitly documentation (if this change requires updating CI documentation). However, explicit "NO" answers for the other impact categories (hardware, security, compatibility) would enhance clarity.

The testing section provides a link to a CI run, but ideally, it should include snippets of relevant log output demonstrating the change in behavior (e.g., showing that previously skipped jobs are now running). It also lacks details on the local build host used for testing. While the linked PR might contain this information, it should be summarized within this PR for easy review. The "before" log section is empty, making it difficult to compare.

In short, while the PR addresses the core requirements, providing more specific details and filling in all sections (even with "NO") would improve its completeness and facilitate review.

@xiaoxiang781216 xiaoxiang781216 merged commit 121205f into apache:master Jan 8, 2025
25 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[BUG] at32f437-mini/systemview: builds fail with error: implicit declaration of function 'SEGGER_RTT_LOCK'
3 participants