What do we think about starting with testing and deferring concurrency and 
collections? The two seem to have very different needs in terms of API 
lifecycle and evolution so having a policy tailored to the right balance of 
producer vs. consumer needs makes sense to me.

On Mon, Aug 24, 2026, at 1:11 PM, Josh McKenzie wrote:
> Can see how that'd come across as a false dichotomy; not my intent or mental 
> model. What I was thinking and shorthanded poorly was - if we said "you need 
> to run CI on all dependents and confirm no regression", that makes utils the 
> single highest-toil place in the ecosystem to get code merged. You'd have to 
> do the A/B triage of your run to a control for every project that consumes 
> it. Definitely not "block on green" - I glossed over that poorly.
> 
> There's also an opportunity for us to automate LLM-based triage of flaky or 
> failing tests to help burn those down, potentially giving us a state where we 
> *actually* had green CI ecosystem wide for the first time in over a decade. 
> That'd change the calculus here quite a bit and just make utils merges long / 
> high compute but not a flaky CI nightmare.
> 
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2026, at 5:36 AM, Mick wrote:
>> 
>> >  1. full CI pass on everything puts a dependency on us having 
>> > consistently green CI or utils becomes the single worst place to try 
>> > and get something merged in the ecosystem. We haven't had consistent 
>> > green CI in the 12 years I've been around; I don't see how we're going 
>> > to start now. This would probably make utils DOA.
>> 
>> 
>> Nit: this is presenting a false dichotomy, imho.  NOT green means 
>> harder/headache but not "not usable/valuable".  Green is not a dependency, 
>> and I don't think that should be presented as a reason to do less testing.
>> 
>> Moving towards (3) should instead be based on what downstream testing do we 
>> need.  If we agree that some set of unit, property and fuzz testing puts us 
>> in a safe place (and every downstream agrees) that should be enough to 
>> warrant the minimalisation fo what CI to run.
>> 
> 

Reply via email to