This task has been migrated to GitLab.

This task has been migrated to GitLab.

This task has been migrated to GitLab.

This task has been migrated to GitLab.

This task has been migrated to GitLab.

This task has been migrated to GitLab.

This task has been migrated to GitLab.

This task has been migrated to GitLab.

This task has been migrated to GitLab.

This task has been migrated to GitLab.

This task has been migrated to GitLab.

This task has been migrated to GitLab.

This task has been migrated to GitLab.

Related https://forge.softwareheritage.org/transactions/detail/PHID-XACT-PSTE-j46unxzdjtok26u/

So like i replied to an email early on (which did not caught up here), the problem lies with the input.
So no real bug whatsoever!

As for the title, it no longer works as we deployed listing phabricator forges in the past, see for example kde's [1] or our own [2]

(This may be irrelevant to our latest refactorings though)

That was already done when I noticed the creation of the random repos.

In T1689#31540, @olasd wrote:

IMy suggestion was having *someone* trigger the merge with a comment on the diff, once the tests pass.

In T1689#31539, @zack wrote:

I'm not a fan of automated merging when the test suite passes. I think merging code from third parties should always be a manual step by someone. If it can be made a Web UI button, even better, if not we will just standardize to the local arc workflow, which I've recently documented in the wiki.

Thanks for the investigation @olasd.

(looks like Herald can't easily trigger on a comment, because that'd be too easy)

So, according to the fine manual (https://secure.phabricator.com/book/phabricator/article/differential_land/) the "Land Revision" button on the Phabricator user interface depends on setting up:

• Drydock repository automation : https://secure.phabricator.com/book/phabricator/article/drydock_repository_automation/
• Which depends on setting up Drydock working copies : https://secure.phabricator.com/book/phabricator/article/drydock_working_copies/
• Which depends on setting up Drydock hosts : https://secure.phabricator.com/book/phabricator/article/drydock_hosts/
• Which depends on Almanac : https://secure.phabricator.com/book/phabricator/article/almanac/

(Top-posting test for good measure).

Closing as wontfix after discussion with @zack, who may take the issue upstream :)

I can reproduce the issue with the exact same contents of the mail you originally sent.

• olasd (Nicolas Dandrimont) <forge@softwareheritage.org> [2018-05-28 15:55:24 +0200]:

Let's add a message to this ticket so I can try to reply to it...

This is now implemented by H22, e.g.:

git push  --force
Counting objects: 3, done.
Delta compression using up to 4 threads.
Compressing objects: 100% (2/2), done.
Writing objects: 100% (3/3), 281 bytes | 281.00 KiB/s, done.
Total 3 (delta 1), reused 0 (delta 0)
remote: *** PUSH REJECTED BY COMMIT HOOK ***
remote: 
remote: This push was rejected by Herald push rule H22.
remote:     Change: branch/master
remote:       Rule: forbid dangerous changes to the master branch in any repository
remote:     Reason: dangerous changes to master branch are forbidden
remote: Transcript: https://forge.softwareheritage.org/herald/transcript/58415/
remote: 
To ssh://forge.softwareheritage.org/source/sandbox.git
 ! [remote rejected] master -> master (pre-receive hook declined)
error: failed to push some refs to 'ssh://git@forge.softwareheritage.org/source/sandbox.git'

while it works when force-pushing to branches other than master.