CI Requirements - Lessons Not Learnt?

[Adriaan de Groot]

On Monday, January 16, 2017 05:32:12 PM Eike Hein wrote:
> I'll be working up a new draft today taking some of the comments
> so far into account, and giving sysadmin the latitude to remove
> projects from CI at their decision if the guidelines are violated
> and maintaining a project on CI becomes unreasonable. This limits
> scope of enforcement (i.e. the consequences for falling out of
> line) to participation in CI instead of the community, which
> seems more pragmatic in hindsight.

Thanks, Eike. It's good to have a slightly more relaxed attitude towards the 
procedures. On the other hand, I think that the way the discussion wandered 
all over the distributions and #ifdefs map has obscured an important question: 
how important is CI to us (as a whole)?

In this thread, various people have mentioned that the CI is important. It's 
one of the big consumers of KDE source (besides developers and distro 
packagers; the distro packagers are on a different schedule and can probably be 
ignored for now).

But CI has a really important function: it shows us the health of the sources 
for everything; and that's something the release team needs, and the whole 
community can be interested in. So "opting out" of CI deprives us of a good 
view of the state of our software products.

[ade]