From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konstantin Ryabitsev Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Thermal-SoC management fixes for v5.0-rc6 Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 15:16:19 -0500 Message-ID: <20190211201619.GA8065@work> References: <20190210041721.GA2805@localhost.localdomain> <154977271617.2362.11794417398216386913.pr-tracker-bot@kernel.org> <20190211031921.GA1799@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Eduardo Valentin , pr-tracker-bot@kernel.org, Rui Zhang , ACPI Devel Maling List , Linux PM , LKML List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 10:34:09AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/evalenti/linux-soc-thermal >> > > fixes >> > >> > has been merged into torvalds/linux.git: >> > https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/7ad915f5ebf5b9e7ca98a7048d8f84a631fe388b >> >> I think the bot is off here because the above commit is about a merge >> from the linux-omap tree from Tony. > >Indeed. > >.. and the pr-tracker-bot thing actually made me ignore the pull >request, thinking I had left it in my inbox despite having pulled it. > >So it would be really good to know why pr-tracker-bot ended up >replying to the wrong email, because it can cause real problems. Okay, so I need guidance on the proper behaviour here. As this request didn't use the magic wording for the commit-id (as generated by git-request-pull), we ended up trying to look up the remote. The remote specified was: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/evalenti/linux-soc-thermal fixes Since it's a short refname, we first try to look it up as a tag: $ git ls-remote git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/evalenti/linux-soc-thermal fixes^{} a6d25f4c951b8b28f2eaec6f891ff834622532f2 refs/tags/omap-for-v3.10-rc1/fixes^{} 77319669af37a1cfc844b801e83343b37e3c7e13 refs/tags/omap/fixes^{} If it finds a matching tag, the script assumes you'd meant to specify the tag, not the head. Is that the opposite of git's behaviour when applying a remote? Should we be checking for a head first, before we try the refname as a tag? I assume that's the case, but want to double-check with you all. -K