Yeah I learned that one today, too (thanks Ian/Braden)
On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: > Good tip, thanks! > > It seems like a rule that you learn one new thing about git every day :P > > On 4/5/13 11:48 AM, "Michal Mocny" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >Fil, > > > >I'll add that you can add a -x to cherry-pick line so that git > >automatically inserts "(cherry picked from commit ...)" to the original > >commit message. > > > >-Michal > > > > > >On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> +1 to reverting. > >> > >> +1 to Shaz's point, slowly people will learn. For the record, if you > >>want > >> to cherry-pick a commit from master into 2.6.x, you would do: > >> > >> $ git checkout master > >> $ git log --pretty=oneline --abbrev-commit HEAD^..HEAD # lets see > >>the > >> last commit > >> abcd123 some commit message > >> $ git checkout 2.6.x > >> $ git cherry-pick abcd123 > >> > >> To be clear, this will create a *new* commit in 2.6.x, so don't be > >> surprised if the SHA changes after you cherry-pick it in. > >> > >> On 4/5/13 9:51 AM, "Shazron" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> >Let's revert, not rollback. I'm sure we expected some teething pains > >> >adjusting to the new scheme. > >> > > >> >On Friday, April 5, 2013, Ian Clelland wrote: > >> > > >> >> It looks like a number of commits intended for 2.7.0 were merged back > >> >>into > >> >> the 2.6.x branch > >> >> > >> >> My commits: > >> >> dbf631c: [CB-2305] Add spec tests for InAppBrowser.insertCSS and > >> >> InAppBrowser.executeScript APIs > >> >> 46e478f: [CB-2226] Add spec test for FileTransfer.abort error > >>callback > >> >> da89eaa: [CB-1517] [CB-1518] Add spec test for gzip-encoded resources > >> >> 2003ff7: [CB-1517] Add an assertion that progress.total < > >> >>progress.loaded > >> >> > >> >> were all committed to master after the 2.6.x branch was split, but > >>then > >> >> master was merged back into 2.6.x (acd1b96, Apr 2) > >> >> > >> >> There may be other commits in there that were merged accidentally; I > >> >> haven't looked at all of them yet. I think that any commits from > >>master > >> >> which *should* be in 2.6.x should have been cherry-picked, rather > >>than > >> >> merging master. > >> >> > >> >> From the iOS thread, I see that da89eaa was reverted, but the rest of > >> >>them > >> >> are still on the 2.6 branch. > >> >> > >> >> It's probably too late to just rewind the 2.6.x branch back to > >>f6cbe2e > >> >> (rewriting public history and all that,) but should we revert the > >>other > >> >> commits before we tag 2.6.0? > >> >> > >> >> Ian > >> >> > >> > >> > >
