On Thu, 2025-03-06 at 09:35 +0100, Jérôme Pouiller wrote: > > I though the missing target tree name was a blocker. > Ah, no. That's just because it doesn't _always_ manage to apply it. It's only a blocker if that's the only thing it reported, but here it just said it was missing but went ahead anyway. Honestly, I have no idea why all that is, sorry. johannes
