Re: [GIT PULL] sound fixes for 3.6-rc6

From: Takashi Iwai
Date: Thu Sep 13 2012 - 11:26:23 EST

At Thu, 13 Sep 2012 08:14:27 -0700,
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Takashi Iwai <tiwai@xxxxxxx> writes:
> >> I can't reproduce here. What is your exact request-pull invocation?
> This question was not answerd.

It was (a sort of), but let me clarify again.
In my original pull request, I did git-request-pull for a signed tag,
but I apparently overlooked the warning.
Then the next test with git 1.7.12, I did it using no annotated/signed
tag, so git-request-pull didn't complain it. When I do it with a
signed tag, it starts warning.

> Did you ask request-pull to ask for
> a branch to be pulled, or did you ask it to ask for the tag to be
> pulled?
> If the former, I would have say it is a pebcak. Linus asked you to
> ask a signed tag to be pulled, and you want to have the tag to be
> pulled, but if you do not give "git request-pull" the tag but a
> branch that the tag points at, the command does not have a good
> reason to countermand your (apparent) wish that the branch is what
> is to be pulled.

Yeah I can understand that. But the problem is that a warning is
moderate so it can be so easily overlooked. It'd be user- (or
subsystem-maintainer-) friendly if this automatic conversion can be


> >> Is request-pull showing a warning like:
> >>
> >> warn: You locally have sound-3.6 but it does not (yet)
> >> warn: appear to be at git://
> >> warn: Do you want to push it there, perhaps?
> >
> > Hm, it looks like the check is performed only for tag objects.
> > In the example below, no warning appears:
> > % git tag mytest for-next
> > % git request-pull mytest~ git:// mytest
> >
> > With an annotated or a signed tag, git seems giving a warning like
> > above, indeed. So my test seemed wrong. Sorry for the noise.
> OK.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at