From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Simmons To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: glitch in patchwork? Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2022 10:56:45 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <39B30904-6037-410C-87CA-ECF93772C8B5@ipfire.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5607928993276593977==" List-Id: --===============5607928993276593977== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 11/24/22 05:32, Michael Tremer wrote: > Hello Paul, > > This does happen sometimes, indeed. > > Mostly it happens with any patches that contain non-ascii characters. > > Patchwork calculates a hash over a patch and stores that hash in its databa= se. We then calculate hashes for all commits and use those to find any patche= s in the database. When there are any funny characters in it, it does not see= m to work. > > I would consider this a bug in Patchwork, but did not have the time to inve= stigate, yet. > > So, those patches need to be manually marked as Staged or Merged. > > -Michael > >> On 24 Nov 2022, at 00:42, Paul Simmons wrote: >> >> Hey, All. >> >> I've noticed occasional discrepancies in PATCHWORK. >> >> For example, https://patchwork.ipfire.org/project/ipfire/patch/20221108200= 911.11156-1-robin.roevens(a)disroot.org/ status displays as "New", but was co= mmitted as https://git.ipfire.org/?p=3Dipfire-2.x.git;a=3Dcommit;h=3De47370a1= 67869da39c5962ff9f9f032d7bd995ee >> >> This isn't a show stopper, but I thought I should point it out. >> >> Thanks, and happy coding, >> Paul >> >> --=20 >> As I=E2=80=99ve gotten older, people think I=E2=80=99ve become lazy. The = truth is I=E2=80=99m just being more energy efficient. >> Very well, then.=C2=A0 I thought I should mention it. Thank you, and thanks to all contributors. P --=20 Excel continues to squat at the heart of business computing like a bowl of le= eches in the ICU. -- Rupert Goodwins, 2020/10/06 --===============5607928993276593977==--