Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> Thanks. A greedy me wonders if things like this can be caught by >> them a bit earlier before they hit 'next', though ;-) > > I've always been a little afraid to touch 'seen' since it does not > necessarily even pass tests, and I don't want to waste too much time > hunting problems in other people's topics. ;) I do not generally recommend using the tip of the 'seen' branch to those who want automated testing, as it more often than not contains topics that are known-broken (which I do on purpose, so that I can point at GitHub CI failure to authors), but it the automated testing includes automatically bisecting once 'seen' is found broken, that would work fine and it would be extra useful. The next greater step would be to feed the bisection result to Copilot or whatever programming peer of your choice, and see if it can fix the breakage. To help the idea of catching before things hit next, it probably would make the most sense to test the tip of the 'jch' branch, which is somewhere between the 'master' and the 'seen' branches and contains a bit more topics than the 'next' branch does. The branch is usually what I use for my work every day, so even though it may have acquired new leaks and UBs that would not cause troubles in practice, it should functionally be a lot more stable and usable than the tip of 'seen'. Thanks.
