Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

agnos.is Forums

  1. Home
  2. Programmer Humor
  3. GitHub Actions radicalized me

GitHub Actions radicalized me

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Programmer Humor
programmerhumor
40 Posts 27 Posters 134 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • A [email protected]

    You work somewhere where the tests don't always fail???

    carrylex@lemmy.worldC This user is from outside of this forum
    carrylex@lemmy.worldC This user is from outside of this forum
    [email protected]
    wrote on last edited by [email protected]
    #4

    You just guessed my job lol

    1 Reply Last reply
    12
    • carrylex@lemmy.worldC [email protected]

      Context: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/44490

      O This user is from outside of this forum
      O This user is from outside of this forum
      [email protected]
      wrote on last edited by
      #5

      Imagine having unit tests, my company could never

      1 Reply Last reply
      20
      • A [email protected]

        You work somewhere where the tests don't always fail???

        paequ2@lemmy.todayP This user is from outside of this forum
        paequ2@lemmy.todayP This user is from outside of this forum
        [email protected]
        wrote on last edited by
        #6

        Have you tried rerunning them all day until they pass? 😄

        jupdown@lemmy.caJ 1 Reply Last reply
        16
        • carrylex@lemmy.worldC [email protected]

          Context: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/44490

          V This user is from outside of this forum
          V This user is from outside of this forum
          [email protected]
          wrote on last edited by
          #7

          How is this meme related to the context?

          1 Reply Last reply
          8
          • A [email protected]

            You work somewhere where the tests don't always fail???

            F This user is from outside of this forum
            F This user is from outside of this forum
            [email protected]
            wrote on last edited by
            #8

            Ha, losers - tests can't fail if you don't have any tests.

            obstreperouscanadian@lemmy.caO 1 Reply Last reply
            52
            • carrylex@lemmy.worldC [email protected]

              Context: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/44490

              E This user is from outside of this forum
              E This user is from outside of this forum
              [email protected]
              wrote on last edited by
              #9

              …it’s okay on rare and understood cases. (Why else would you be able to merge if it’s failing.)

              1 Reply Last reply
              2
              • carrylex@lemmy.worldC [email protected]

                Context: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/44490

                K This user is from outside of this forum
                K This user is from outside of this forum
                [email protected]
                wrote on last edited by
                #10

                Sure, but do you want to risk catastrophy as a way to filter out bad developers?

                1 Reply Last reply
                9
                • A [email protected]

                  You work somewhere where the tests don't always fail???

                  decipher_jeanne@lemmy.blahaj.zoneD This user is from outside of this forum
                  decipher_jeanne@lemmy.blahaj.zoneD This user is from outside of this forum
                  [email protected]
                  wrote on last edited by [email protected]
                  #11

                  I mean what's the point of your test if they fail. It's already bad enough that one of our test is flacky. To be fair I am working in a company that does a lot of system safety and a lot of our stuff isn't just tested, it's mathematicaly proven.

                  L 1 Reply Last reply
                  5
                  • decipher_jeanne@lemmy.blahaj.zoneD [email protected]

                    I mean what's the point of your test if they fail. It's already bad enough that one of our test is flacky. To be fair I am working in a company that does a lot of system safety and a lot of our stuff isn't just tested, it's mathematicaly proven.

                    L This user is from outside of this forum
                    L This user is from outside of this forum
                    [email protected]
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #12

                    Shit! You got deadlines, and managers or customers piling in? Yeah, they don’t pass, but who cares! The code works….probably! Ship it!

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    10
                    • carrylex@lemmy.worldC [email protected]

                      Context: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/44490

                      M This user is from outside of this forum
                      M This user is from outside of this forum
                      [email protected]
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #13

                      This is dumb as fuck.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • carrylex@lemmy.worldC [email protected]

                        Context: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/44490

                        N This user is from outside of this forum
                        N This user is from outside of this forum
                        [email protected]
                        wrote on last edited by [email protected]
                        #14

                        We have a few non-required checks here and there - mostly as you need an admin to list a check as required and that can be annoying to do. And we still get code merged in occasionally that fails those checks. Hell, I have merged in code that fails the checks. Sometimes checks take a while to run, and there is this nice merge when ready button in GH. But it will gladly merge your code in once all the required checks have passed ignoring any non-required checks.

                        And it is such a useful button to have, especially in a large codebase with lots of developers - just merge in the code when it is ready and avoid forgetting about things for a few hours and possibly having to rebase and run all the checks again because of some minor merge conflict...

                        But GH required checks are just broken for large code bases as well. We don't always want to run every check on every code change. We don't need to run all unit tests when only a documentation has changed. But required checks are all or nothing. They need to return something or else you cannot merge at all (though this might apply to external checks more then gh actions maybe). I really wish there was a require all checks to pass and a at least one check must run. Or if external checks could tell GH when they are required or not. Either way there is a lot of room for improvement on the GH PR checks.

                        V 1 Reply Last reply
                        5
                        • paequ2@lemmy.todayP [email protected]

                          Have you tried rerunning them all day until they pass? 😄

                          jupdown@lemmy.caJ This user is from outside of this forum
                          jupdown@lemmy.caJ This user is from outside of this forum
                          [email protected]
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #15

                          Would you look at that - the pipeline is green now! Quick everybody, merge your stuff while it's stable (/s) (sadly a true story tho)

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          9
                          • F [email protected]

                            Ha, losers - tests can't fail if you don't have any tests.

                            obstreperouscanadian@lemmy.caO This user is from outside of this forum
                            obstreperouscanadian@lemmy.caO This user is from outside of this forum
                            [email protected]
                            wrote on last edited by [email protected]
                            #16

                            Why write tests when you should be writing more features the business needs now but will never use?

                            A 1 Reply Last reply
                            15
                            • N [email protected]

                              We have a few non-required checks here and there - mostly as you need an admin to list a check as required and that can be annoying to do. And we still get code merged in occasionally that fails those checks. Hell, I have merged in code that fails the checks. Sometimes checks take a while to run, and there is this nice merge when ready button in GH. But it will gladly merge your code in once all the required checks have passed ignoring any non-required checks.

                              And it is such a useful button to have, especially in a large codebase with lots of developers - just merge in the code when it is ready and avoid forgetting about things for a few hours and possibly having to rebase and run all the checks again because of some minor merge conflict...

                              But GH required checks are just broken for large code bases as well. We don't always want to run every check on every code change. We don't need to run all unit tests when only a documentation has changed. But required checks are all or nothing. They need to return something or else you cannot merge at all (though this might apply to external checks more then gh actions maybe). I really wish there was a require all checks to pass and a at least one check must run. Or if external checks could tell GH when they are required or not. Either way there is a lot of room for improvement on the GH PR checks.

                              V This user is from outside of this forum
                              V This user is from outside of this forum
                              [email protected]
                              wrote on last edited by [email protected]
                              #17

                              There are definitely ways to run partial testing suites on modified code only. I feel like much of what you're complaining about is an already solved problem.

                              B N 2 Replies Last reply
                              2
                              • carrylex@lemmy.worldC [email protected]

                                Context: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/44490

                                Z This user is from outside of this forum
                                Z This user is from outside of this forum
                                [email protected]
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #18

                                If you only write tests for things that won't fail, you're doing it wrong. Are you anticipating some other feature coming soon? Write a failing test for it. Did you find untested code that might run soon with a little work? Write a test for it. Did a nonessential feature break while adding an essential feature, let the test fail and fix it later.

                                B 1 Reply Last reply
                                3
                                • obstreperouscanadian@lemmy.caO [email protected]

                                  Why write tests when you should be writing more features the business needs now but will never use?

                                  A This user is from outside of this forum
                                  A This user is from outside of this forum
                                  [email protected]
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #19

                                  a bug? No problem we will just fix it in the next release. loop for eternity.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  3
                                  • carrylex@lemmy.worldC [email protected]

                                    Context: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/44490

                                    thenamlessguy@lemmy.worldT This user is from outside of this forum
                                    thenamlessguy@lemmy.worldT This user is from outside of this forum
                                    [email protected]
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #20

                                    This just sounds like "my frontend only changes shouldn't be impacted by some dumbass breaking backend two commits ago", which seems reasonable.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    15
                                    • carrylex@lemmy.worldC [email protected]

                                      Context: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/44490

                                      wfh@lemmy.zipW This user is from outside of this forum
                                      wfh@lemmy.zipW This user is from outside of this forum
                                      [email protected]
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #21

                                      Bro just crash the CI because the linter found an extra space bro trust me bro this is important. Also Unit tests are optional.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      5
                                      • Z [email protected]

                                        If you only write tests for things that won't fail, you're doing it wrong. Are you anticipating some other feature coming soon? Write a failing test for it. Did you find untested code that might run soon with a little work? Write a test for it. Did a nonessential feature break while adding an essential feature, let the test fail and fix it later.

                                        B This user is from outside of this forum
                                        B This user is from outside of this forum
                                        [email protected]
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #22

                                        Eww, no. You're doing tests wrong. The point of tests is to understand whether changes to the code (or dependencies) break any functionality. If you have failing tests, it makes this task very difficult and time consuming for people who need it most, i.e. people new to the project. "Is this test failing because of something I've done? <half an hour of debugging later> Oh, it was broken before my changes too!". If you insist on adding broken tests, mark them as "expected to fail" at least, so that they don't affect the overall test suite result (and when someone fixes the functionality they have to un-mark them as expected to fail), and the checkmark is green. You should never merge PRs/MRs which fail any tests - it is an extremely bad habit and forms a bad culture in your project.

                                        W K 2 Replies Last reply
                                        8
                                        • carrylex@lemmy.worldC [email protected]

                                          Context: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/44490

                                          Q This user is from outside of this forum
                                          Q This user is from outside of this forum
                                          [email protected]
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #23

                                          The real problem is merging before waiting for that one slow CI pipeline to complete

                                          N P 2 Replies Last reply
                                          23
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups