Skip to content

doc: add note on visibility of CI failures to new contributor guide #64256

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
sxa wants to merge 3 commits into from
+9 −0
Closed

doc: add note on visibility of CI failures to new contributor guide #64256

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
c461578
doc: add note on visibility of CI failures to new contributor guide
sxa Jul 2, 2026
649c1be
fixups following review
sxa Jul 3, 2026
b0de4e9
Update doc/contributing/first-contributions.md
sxa Jul 4, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
7 changes: 7 additions & 0 deletions doc/contributing/first-contributions.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -168,6 +168,13 @@ before approving the CI runs. Similar to the review process, be patient and resp
the volunteers' time when you are asking for help to trigger the CI runs, this helps build
trust to make future contributions smoother.

Since read access to the CI is also restricted, one of the collaborators also will need to let
you know about any failures unless you are a member of one of the platform teams in the Node.js
organisation. If after a day or so from a collaborator triggering a CI your PR shows a failure
in either the `node-test-pull-request` or `node-test-commit-*` checks it's worth adding a
comment to the PR asking what tests are failed, as the collaborator may not realise that you
cannot see the results directly in the CI.

@MikeMcC399 MikeMcC399 Jul 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In this section, I'd suggest referring specifically to the Jenkins CI. There is no restriction on viewing the GitHub Actions CI.

I would also remove the reference to "unless you are a member of one of the platform teams in the Node.js
organisation" since this is a document for first-time contributors.

I did actually bring up this issue when the original PR was submitted.
See #63685 (comment)

@sxa sxa Jul 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fair on the CI clarification - I tend to always be referring to "CI" as the jenkins CI as distinct the "GHA checks" or similar, but I appreciate that's probably more of a "me" thing so I'll add "Jenkins" in there :-)

Ref the platform teams I did consider that but it's possible that someone would be added to a platform team for triage who hasn't directly contributed a fix themselves. It also means that it calls out another mechanism for such contributors to be able to access the jenkins CI if they are volunteering to be part of a platform team. So maybe it's a bit of extra noise in here, but potentially useful noise. I'd be ok either way butso I'll leave it in case other reviewers have an opinion.


### Q: The CI runs showed some failures that seem unrelated to my change. What should I do?

The Node.js CIs are known to be flaky. Consult the daily reports in
Expand Down
Loading