Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] ci: add support for GitLab CI

From: Patrick Steinhardt <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2023 13:11:23 +0200

On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 12:49:19PM +0200, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 10:17:33AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 11:07:08AM +0200, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > > you should probably choose a less generic name for the jobs, at least
> > > debian-*.
> > 
> > The names are all preexisting, so I cannot change them.
> > 
> aren't they coming from the yml file? would adjusting them in the company
> setup be an unreasonable effort?

They come from the ".gitlab-ci.yml" file, but I have to reuse the exact
names that GitHub Actions already uses or otherwise we're not testing
for the same thing. The preexisting CI scripts for Git expect exactly
those names.

I do agree that they may benefit from a redesign so that they're more
explicit. But I don't think this patch series here is where we should do
that refactoring.

> > I don't quite know what you mean by counter-intuitive patch structure.
> > 
> it looked like you're adding the function to the github branch, not to the
> freshly added gitlab branch. of course that's just a diffing artifact.

Ah, thought you meant the larger "structure of how things were layed
out". Agreed and fixed in v2 of the patch series.

Patrick