'Builds' is not a good name for commit statuses
Right now, you already have the amazing ability to add a whole bunch of checks to any commit and set its status as such.
You could have four external services setting the status of a commit and you would get a nice list in your merge request of the status of each.
However, we call these
Builds, which is a confusing name, as our CI also does
Builds, which are different things (status vs. running of script).
@ayufan called this a 'very big problem' and I agree that this is confusing.
I propose we call what is now
Builds in a merge request either (vote if you like):
A merge request would say that "All
checks/jobs/status are green", and
Merge when all checks/jobs/statuses are completed/green