Re: [PATCH v3 2/8] ci: fix "fedora-breaking-changes-meson" job

[Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>]

On Wed, Oct 14, 2026 at 07:07:16AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2026 at 12:35:08PM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> 
> > > Seems obviously correct, but I wonder if just:
> > > 
> > >   *breaking-changes*)
> > > 
> > > would fix this and prevent any issues for possible future jobs. The
> > > downside of a loose pattern is false matches, but it seems like a small
> > > risk given our universe of jobs.
> > 
> > In general I think the way we structure these is somewhat lackluster:
> > 
> >   - I never really understood the split between "ci/lib.sh" and
> >     "ci/run-build-and-tests.sh".
> > 
> >   - There is a bunch of duplication that could be avoided.
> > 
> >   - And your suggestion makes sense, too.
> 
> Yeah, I think there is a combination of organic growth and the fact that
> nobody really cares about ci unless it's failing. It is probably ripe
> for cleanup if somebody cares to spend time on it.
> 
> > I originally carried a patch that merges all of this into "ci/lib.sh",
> > and it also did changes similar to what you propose. We could probably
> > revive that patch, but if so I'd propose to do that as a follow-up.
> 
> I'm OK with doing it later. I noticed some other similar spots in the
> context while reading your patches. E.g., anything with *-sha256* could
> set the default hash, and so on. I expect you might have found them for
> your patch, too. ;)

Yes. sha256, breaking-changes, reftables, meson all fall in the same
category.

Patrick