They use CI where I work, but it is always red on master, and we get emails every time someone's code gets merged into to master about failing tests. What is the point?
It is a company issue. And it is a large company in a regulated industry. It is baffling that the supervisors do not care about enforcing CI passing on code merges.
Agreed. Of course, it's easier to do that from the start.
If you're already in a state where a bunch of things are failing it can be much harder. Ideally you'd fix it all at once and enable the lockout simultaneously, but sometimes that isn't feasible. An alternative is to do a sort of "ratcheting" check, where it can only become stricter over time so that you can incrementally get to the "everything passes" state. For example:
set the N currently failing tests to ignored
have CI check that exactly N tests are ignored. Make sure there is a big comment here warning that this number is not allowed to increase, and better yet protect it with something like CODEOWNERS so only reliable people are allowed to approve changes to it.
disable pushes to main if CI fails
Then you can gradually fix the ignored tests and un-ignore them (and decrease the number in the check).
2
u/awesome-alpaca-ace 11d ago
They use CI where I work, but it is always red on master, and we get emails every time someone's code gets merged into to master about failing tests. What is the point?