At Thu, 13 Sep 2012 08:14:27 -0700,
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Takashi Iwai <> 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 git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to