πŸ› File an issue
Pipeline Status
🟑 Degraded
Success Rate (7d)
91.2%
Builds (7d)
602
Median Duration
14m
P95: 34m
DORA Level
High
Deployment Frequency
72.5 / week
elite
How often builds are deployed. Elite: >7Γ—/week, High: 1–7Γ—/week, Medium: monthly, Low: less than monthly.
Lead Time
41m
elite
Time from commit to production. Elite: <1h, High: <1d, Medium: <1wk, Low: >1wk.
Change Failure Rate
7.0%
high
Percentage of deployments causing a failure. Elite: <5%, High: <10%, Medium: <15%, Low: β‰₯15%.
MTTR
14.6h
high
Mean time to restore service after a failure. Elite: <1h, High: <1d, Medium: <1wk, Low: >1wk.
Build Success Rate
Daily Build Outcomes
Build Duration Trends
Avg Duration by Repo
Failure Category Breakdown
MTTR
14.6h
Mean Time to Recovery
MTBF
5.0h
Mean Time Between Failures
Flakiness Leaderboard β€” Top 10 Flaky Jobs
# Job Name Repo Runs Failures Failure Rate Flakiness Index Last Failure Top Failing Step
1 build / sign bluefin-lts 921 688 7470.1%
0.342
today
2 build dakota 47 27 5744.7%
0.319
1w ago Build OCI image with BuildStream
3 Build and push image common 68 12 1764.7%
0.314
6d ago Build Image
4 build-dx / sign bluefin-lts 67 32 4776.1%
0.308
5d ago
5 build-dx-hwe / sign bluefin-lts 67 33 4925.4%
0.300
5d ago
6 build-hwe / sign bluefin-lts 67 32 4776.1%
0.282
5d ago
7 build / Create bluefin-gdx:stream10 Man… bluefin-lts 169 39 2307.7%
0.277
today Exit on failure
8 compile-oci (thunderbird-nightly, x86_6… testhub 18 6 3333.3%
0.267
1w ago Build with flatpak-builder (cac…
9 build / Build and push image (amd64) bluefin-lts 914 123 1345.7%
0.262
today Build Image
10 build / Build and push image (arm64) bluefin-lts 914 125 1367.6%
0.254
today Build Image
Builds Per Day
Avg Queue Wait Time
Build Trigger Breakdown
Builder Comparison β€” All Repos
Repo Success Rate 7d Success Rate 30d Avg Duration Total Runs (7d) Last Stream Status
bluefin 90.9% 87.6% 30m 132 🟒 success
bluefin-lts 94.7% 94.1% 15m 374 🟒 success
common 76.7% 84.8% 1m 43 πŸ”΄ action_required
dakota 100.0% 64.5% 16m 9 🟒 success
iso 0.0% 66.7% 19m 0 πŸ”΄ failure
finpilot 100.0% 100.0% 5m 7 🟒 success
testhub 70.3% 78.5% 11m 37 🟒 success

Stream Health

Repo Stream 7d Rate 30d Rate Runs (7d) Avg Duration Last Run Status
bluefin build-image-beta 20.0% 9.1% 5 25m 4d ago πŸ”΄
build-image-latest-main 92.1% 91.6% 63 31m <1h ago 🟒
build-image-stable 95.3% 90.2% 64 30m <1h ago 🟒
bluefin-lts build-dx 95.8% 96.7% 71 14m 14h ago 🟒
build-dx-hwe 98.6% 98.7% 71 16m 14h ago 🟒
build-gdx 87.3% 86.1% 71 17m 14h ago 🟒
build-gnome50 89.5% 81.0% 19 17m 22h ago 🟒
build-regular 95.8% 97.5% 71 13m 14h ago 🟒
build-regular-hwe 97.2% 96.1% 71 14m 14h ago 🟒
common build 76.7% 84.8% 43 1m 8h ago 🟑
dakota build 100.0% 64.5% 9 16m 10h ago 🟒
iso build-iso-all 0.0% 0.0% 0 20m 7d ago πŸ”΄
build-iso-lts-hwe 0.0% 66.7% 0 18m 7d ago πŸ”΄
build-iso-stable 0.0% 100.0% 0 19m 7d ago 🟒
finpilot build 100.0% 100.0% 7 5m 20h ago 🟒
testhub build 70.3% 78.5% 37 11m 6h ago 🟒

Architecture Comparison

aarch64
94.3%
7d success rate
2mavg duration123jobs (7d)
testhub94.3%
amd64
92.4%
7d success rate
14mavg duration449jobs (7d)
bluefin-lts92.4%
arm64
91.8%
7d success rate
13mavg duration449jobs (7d)
bluefin-lts91.8%
x86_64
90.2%
7d success rate
3mavg duration123jobs (7d)
testhub90.2%
Publish Reliability
Repos at Full Coverage
2/7
β‰₯95% success rate (7d)
Overall 7d Success Rate
76.1%
Avg across all repos
Repos with Recent Activity
6/7
Total runs > 0 (7d)

Publish step tracking requires live build data β€” shown after first successful CI run.

Supply Chain Security

bluefin
Cosign Signing
95.3%
30d success rate
SBOM Coverage
96.9%
30d success rate
bluefin-lts
Cosign Signing
47.8%
30d success rate
SBOM Coverage
3.9%
30d success rate
common
Cosign Signing
85.7%
30d success rate
SBOM Coverage
0.0%
30d success rate
dakota
Cosign Signing
0.0%
30d success rate
SBOM Coverage
0.0%
30d success rate
iso
Cosign Signing
0.0%
30d success rate
SBOM Coverage
0.0%
30d success rate
finpilot
Cosign Signing
0.0%
30d success rate
SBOM Coverage
0.0%
30d success rate
testhub
Cosign Signing
93.6%
30d success rate
SBOM Coverage
93.6%
30d success rate

Rates computed from workflow step names over last 30 days. Steps not detected in pipeline are shown as β€”.

Recent Builds
Repo Workflow Branch Trigger Duration Started Jobs
🟒 bluefin Latest Images gh-readonly-queue/main/pr-4439-9c10bdc91be9abf3f52eaf6238916ee878370af3 other 33m 2026-04-08T05:47:01Z 6/6 βœ“
🟒 bluefin Stable Images gh-readonly-queue/main/pr-4439-9c10bdc91be9abf3f52eaf6238916ee878370af3 other 34m 2026-04-08T05:47:01Z 7/7 βœ“
🟒 bluefin Latest Images renovate/ghcr.io-ublue-os-silverblue-main-latest PR 26m 2026-04-08T05:18:36Z 6/6 βœ“
🟒 bluefin Stable Images renovate/ghcr.io-ublue-os-silverblue-main-latest PR 29m 2026-04-08T05:18:36Z 7/7 βœ“
🟒 bluefin Latest Images gh-readonly-queue/main/pr-4438-6355b3a876cc73182a652ab212b6bc4546e7d35a other 32m 2026-04-08T03:42:24Z 6/6 βœ“
🟒 bluefin Stable Images gh-readonly-queue/main/pr-4438-6355b3a876cc73182a652ab212b6bc4546e7d35a other 32m 2026-04-08T03:42:24Z 7/7 βœ“
🟒 bluefin Latest Images renovate/ghcr.io-ublue-os-silverblue-main-latest PR 29m 2026-04-08T03:13:40Z 6/6 βœ“
🟒 bluefin Stable Images renovate/ghcr.io-ublue-os-silverblue-main-latest PR 29m 2026-04-08T03:13:40Z 7/7 βœ“
🟒 testhub [main] all apps: build β†’ sign … main push 13m 2026-04-07T23:59:04Z 9/9 βœ“
🟒 testhub [main] all apps: build β†’ sign … main push 13m 2026-04-07T23:58:16Z 9/9 βœ“
🟒 testhub [main] all apps: build β†’ sign … main push 12m 2026-04-07T23:54:50Z 9/9 βœ“
🟒 testhub [main] all apps: build β†’ sign … main push 11m 2026-04-07T23:52:25Z 9/9 βœ“
🟒 testhub [gh-readonly-queue/main/pr-88-… gh-readonly-queue/main/pr-88-52cbe041f18185b5410d4020d321e152f9060bf8 other 13m 2026-04-07T23:52:24Z 9/9 βœ“
🟒 testhub [gh-readonly-queue/main/pr-87-… gh-readonly-queue/main/pr-87-3fbfc8c4dff0d1bcabc152e0b752bfd66798e992 other 15m 2026-04-07T23:51:50Z 9/9 βœ“
🟒 testhub [gh-readonly-queue/main/pr-91-… gh-readonly-queue/main/pr-91-cd0a72b010242845387d3d44257fbc0198f2829d other 11m 2026-04-07T23:48:50Z 9/9 βœ“
🟒 testhub [gh-readonly-queue/main/pr-90-… gh-readonly-queue/main/pr-90-4e6165a1900a3b3c3cc624b02350951592264b81 other 14m 2026-04-07T23:48:49Z 9/9 βœ“
🟒 testhub [gh-readonly-queue/main/pr-89-… gh-readonly-queue/main/pr-89-ff95380f1608d517ec63f22873c52bf5f1cac4ce other 10m 2026-04-07T23:48:48Z 9/9 βœ“
🟒 testhub [91/merge] all apps: build β†’ s… fix/update-goose-v1.29.1 PR 3m 2026-04-07T23:43:25Z 7/7 βœ“
🟒 testhub [90/merge] all apps: build β†’ s… fix/promote-tuner PR 4m 2026-04-07T23:42:44Z 7/7 βœ“
🟒 testhub [89/merge] all apps: build β†’ s… fix/promote-kontainer PR 3m 2026-04-07T23:42:38Z 7/7 βœ“

Further Reading

The metrics on this page are grounded in peer-reviewed research and open standards. These resources explain what each metric means, why it predicts software delivery performance, and how to improve it.

Software Delivery Performance
DORA Metrics β€” Four Keys

The canonical framework for measuring software delivery: Deployment Frequency, Lead Time for Changes, Change Failure Rate, and Time to Restore Service. Published by Google Cloud's DevOps Research and Assessment team and validated across thousands of organizations since 2014.

Supply Chain Security
OpenSSF Scorecard

Automated security health checks for open source projects, scoring 0–10 across checks including signed releases, SBOM presence, branch protection, pinned dependencies, and CI test coverage. Produced by the Open Source Security Foundation (OpenSSF), a Linux Foundation project.

Supply Chain Security
SLSA β€” Supply-chain Levels for Software Artifacts

A graduated framework (L0–L3) for verifiable software build integrity. Each level adds stronger guarantees: L1 means provenance exists, L2 means it is signed by a hosted build platform, L3 means the build environment itself is hardened and isolated. Developed by Google and adopted as an OpenSSF standard.

Supply Chain Security
Sigstore / Cosign

Keyless, identity-based artifact signing backed by a public transparency log (Rekor). Cosign signs and verifies container images and release artifacts using short-lived OIDC certificates β€” no long-lived private keys to manage or rotate. A CNCF project used by Kubernetes, Tekton, and the Bluefin image pipeline.

Supply Chain Security
SBOM β€” Software Bill of Materials

A machine-readable inventory of every component and dependency in a software artifact. SBOMs make vulnerability response faster β€” when a new CVE is published, you can immediately know which of your images are affected. The OpenSSF SBOM Everywhere SIG maintains tooling guidance and naming conventions.

Supply Chain Security
CNCF TAG Security β€” Supply Chain Best Practices

The CNCF Technical Advisory Group for Security publishes authoritative whitepapers on cloud-native supply chain security. The Software Supply Chain Best Practices paper (v2, 2025) and the Secure Software Factory reference architecture define the practices that the Scorecard and SLSA checks encode.

Platform Engineering
CNCF Platforms White Paper

The authoritative CNCF definition of what internal developer platforms are, what they should measure (user satisfaction, self-service rate, onboarding time), and how platform teams should operate. Published by the TAG App Delivery Platforms Working Group. Recommends DORA metrics as the delivery measurement standard for platform teams.

Platform Engineering
Platform Engineering Maturity Model

A 4-level model (Provisional β†’ Operational β†’ Scalable β†’ Optimizing) across five aspects: Investment, Adoption, Interfaces, Operations, and Measurement. Helps platform teams understand where they are and what practices characterize the next level. Published by the CNCF TAG App Delivery Platforms Working Group.

Platform Engineering
Cloud Native Maturity Model

A 5-level model (Build β†’ Operate β†’ Scale β†’ Improve β†’ Adapt) across Business Outcomes, People, Process, Policy, and Technology. Maintained by the CNCF Cartografos Working Group. Version 4 (2025) adds AI and FinOps dimensions. Useful for understanding where cloud-native adoption fits in the broader organizational journey.

Research
Accelerate β€” The Science of Lean Software and DevOps

The peer-reviewed research behind DORA metrics. Nicole Forsgren, Jez Humble, and Gene Kim identified 24 technical, process, and cultural capabilities that predict software delivery performance and organizational outcomes. Required reading for understanding why deployment frequency and lead time matter.

Research
SRE Golden Signals

Google's Site Reliability Engineering book defines four signals sufficient to monitor any user-facing service: Latency, Traffic, Errors, and Saturation. These are the production observability complement to DORA β€” they define what a "failure" actually is (without them, Change Failure Rate cannot be accurately measured) and predict when MTTR will spike before incidents occur.

Research
SPACE Framework β€” Developer Productivity

DORA measures what the pipeline does; SPACE measures how developers experience it. Developed by Nicole Forsgren (GitHub), Margaret-Anne Storey, and colleagues at Microsoft Research. Five dimensions: Satisfaction, Performance, Activity, Communication/Collaboration, and Efficiency. Never measure activity in isolation.