On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 11:42 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 11:29 AM Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 11:07 AM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> +Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> who's taking some (shared?) >>> ownership of Phabricator these days. >>> >>> Mehdi - was Phab updated recently (such that we might've picked up new >>> semantics)? >>> >> >> No: I upgraded the hardware and the OS, but not Phab itself yet. >> >> I have a test instance running with an upgraded Phab though, it may have >> been sending duplicate emails in the last day or two when I didn't notice I >> had the email daemon running. >> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 4:25 AM Jay Foad via llvm-dev < >>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Has anyone else noticed Phabricator sending emails saying: >>>> This revision was not accepted when it landed; it landed in state >>>> "Needs Review". >>>> when the review clearly has been accepted by someone? >>>> >>>> Some recent examples: >>>> https://reviews.llvm.org/D83952 >>> >>> >> Seems like this one closed as expected without the message? >> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20200720/808734.html >> > > In my inbox I have two emails for that review. > (though, also, on the commits list, I do see this: > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20200720/808735.html - > though my mail client (gmail) is rendering this one as in the same > thread/doesn't seem to show the "[Differential]" prefix in the subject - > not sure what's going on there, usually gmail is /too/ ready to group mails > by actual subject text, rather than by thread ids in the email hedaers... ) > Thanks! I dug a bit and found out that these came from my test instance, I ran an upgraded Phabricator instance and didn't disable polling the repository: so it closed the revision without having any approval. -- Mehdi > > >> https://reviews.llvm.org/D80116 >>> >>> >> Same here: >> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20200720/808778.html >> >> Can you forward me the email you received for these revisions? >> > > Similarly, the separate "[Differential]" email seems to be unthreaded and > contains the problematic "not accepted when it landed" text: > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20200720/808779.html > > >> >> >> >>> >>> Hard for me to tell what happened here. I wonder if it's related to >>> making changes after review/before committing. While that's common in LLVM, >>> I could imagine a review tool (especially if we picked up a newer version - >>> as I don't think it's always had this behavior) might get fussy about that >>> - perhaps it'd be configurable, so it'd say "this was committed with extra >>> changes" but not "This was committed without review". >>> >>> Do you have any examples that didn't have post-approval-pre-commit >>> changes that still got this annotation about being committed without review? >>> >>> https://reviews.llvm.org/D81267 >>> >>> >>> Last one seems more clear - one of the reviewers (rupprecht) still had >>> the review marked "requires changes", so it was committed without closure >>> on that >>> >> >> Indeed this one shows the message: >> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20200713/807554.html >> >> -- >> Mehdi >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200721/c742c232/attachment.html>
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4