# Automation to ensure green CI on master

**URL:** https://discourse.julialang.org/t/automation-to-ensure-green-ci-on-master/102616
**Category:** Internals & Design
**Created:** [August 8, 2023, 8:50pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/automation-to-ensure-green-ci-on-master/102616 "2023-08-08T20:50:57Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 22

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![jar1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c0e974/32.png) [@jar1](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/jar1)
#### Post date: [August 9, 2023, 7:49pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/automation-to-ensure-green-ci-on-master/102616/22 "2023-08-09T19:49:01Z")

</div>

Relevant from another thread

> [@Making the review process more pleasant for new contributors](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/making-the-review-process-more-pleasant-for-new-contributors/102604/37):
>
> We don’t (deliberately) merge PRs that cause new failures. Most current causes of failures probably passed CI when they were initially submitted, but intermittent issues or hardware changes or subtle interactions with other changes might cause them to (sometimes) fail; if you have enough flaky tests and failure of just one is enough to call the CI run a failure, then CI failures are common.
> 
> I’m not saying this is good, but chasing down the causes tends to be hard work and not that many people make this a core mission. If you want to find examples of PRs fixing flaky tests, a subset (probably only a minority) can be found with the “ci” label: [Pull requests · JuliaLang/julia · GitHub](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed+label%3Aci+)
> 
> Sometimes, though, things get through due to inadequate test coverage and only discovered later.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/automation-to-ensure-green-ci-on-master/102616)._