On Mon, Jan 24 2022, Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget wrote: > Background > ========== > > Recent patches intended to help readers figure out CI failures much quicker > than before. Unfortunately, they haven't been entirely positive for me. For > example, they broke the branch protections in Microsoft's fork of Git, where > we require Pull Requests to pass a certain set of Checks (which are > identified by their names) and therefore caused follow-up work. This seems to be a reference to my df7375d7728 (CI: use shorter names that fit in UX tooltips, 2021-11-23) merged as part of ab/ci-updates, and I understand from this summary that you had some custom job somewhere that scraped the job names which broke. That's unfortunate, I do think being able to actually read the tooltips in the GitHub UI was a worthwhile trade-off in the end though. But I'm entirely confused about what any of that has to do with this series, which is about changing how the job output itself is presented and summarized, and not about the job names, and making them fit in tooltips. Later in the summary you note: > Using CI and in general making it easier for new contributors is an area I'm > passionate about, and one I'd like to see improved. > [...] > ⊗ linux-gcc (ubuntu-latest) > failed: t9800.20 submit from detached head Which has one of the new and shorter jobnames, but in a part of the UX where the length didn't matter, and I can't find a way where it does.
