The advisory printed the pinned SHA and HEAD and left it there. #56 records an hour spent blaming the runner for a red that a merge in another repository had caused — the message told you to regenerate and not why regenerating had suddenly become necessary.
It now lists the commits between the pin and HEAD that touched docs/, with author and subject, and says plainly that a failure below comes from a change in another repository rather than from anything in this one.
pinned: 9775fbf…
at HEAD: a1b2c3d…
flamenet-e2e has moved since this repo pinned it. Commits touching docs/:
a1b2c3d Android is v3, and it has been run (relay#46)
If the check below fails, THAT is why — a change in another
repository, not anything in this one. See .e2e-ref.md …
Deliberately only in the -head advisory. The blocking doc-pages job runs against the pin, so when it fails somebody in this repo edited the markdown without regenerating — a local mistake, where the existing message is exactly right. Adding "another repo did this" there would be a lie most of the time.
Also drops --depth 1.git log PINNED..HEAD needs the history between the two, and a shallow clone has none of it — the old command would have printed nothing and looked like "no relevant commits". That is the same silent-nothing shape the issue is about, hiding inside the fix for it.
Validated through the ci/lint API rather than by pushing and watching, since a YAML mistake here produces a pipeline with zero jobs and a null error list.
Relates to #56.
The advisory printed the pinned SHA and HEAD and left it there. #56 records **an hour spent blaming the runner** for a red that a merge in another repository had caused — the message told you to regenerate and not why regenerating had suddenly become necessary.
It now lists the commits between the pin and HEAD that touched `docs/`, with author and subject, and says plainly that a failure below comes from a change in another repository rather than from anything in this one.
```
pinned: 9775fbf…
at HEAD: a1b2c3d…
flamenet-e2e has moved since this repo pinned it. Commits touching docs/:
a1b2c3d Android is v3, and it has been run (relay#46)
If the check below fails, THAT is why — a change in another
repository, not anything in this one. See .e2e-ref.md …
```
**Deliberately only in the `-head` advisory.** The blocking `doc-pages` job runs against the **pin**, so when it fails somebody in this repo edited the markdown without regenerating — a local mistake, where the existing message is exactly right. Adding "another repo did this" there would be a lie most of the time.
**Also drops `--depth 1`.** `git log PINNED..HEAD` needs the history between the two, and a shallow clone has none of it — the old command would have printed nothing and looked like "no relevant commits". That is the same silent-nothing shape the issue is about, hiding inside the fix for it.
Validated through the `ci/lint` API rather than by pushing and watching, since a YAML mistake here produces a pipeline with zero jobs and a null error list.
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
Relates to #56.
The advisory printed the pinned SHA and HEAD and left it there. #56 records an hour spent blaming the runner for a red that a merge in another repository had caused — the message told you to regenerate and not why regenerating had suddenly become necessary.
It now lists the commits between the pin and HEAD that touched
docs/, with author and subject, and says plainly that a failure below comes from a change in another repository rather than from anything in this one.Deliberately only in the
-headadvisory. The blockingdoc-pagesjob runs against the pin, so when it fails somebody in this repo edited the markdown without regenerating — a local mistake, where the existing message is exactly right. Adding "another repo did this" there would be a lie most of the time.Also drops
--depth 1.git log PINNED..HEADneeds the history between the two, and a shallow clone has none of it — the old command would have printed nothing and looked like "no relevant commits". That is the same silent-nothing shape the issue is about, hiding inside the fix for it.Validated through the
ci/lintAPI rather than by pushing and watching, since a YAML mistake here produces a pipeline with zero jobs and a null error list.mentioned in commit
335139ae20changed the description