I don't have a --short for symbolic-ref, and I already posted the stack trace:
Here's what I get when I'm on the 2.9.x branch. Am I supposed to be on something else? Shouldn't coho be smart enough to deal? Can we make it easier to debug when things go off the rails? jbowser-MacBookPro:cordova-js jbowser$ git symbolic-ref HEAD refs/heads/2.9.x On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Andrew Grieve <[email protected]> wrote: > Ahh, okay, I see what you mean about the change. The jira bug says to tag > them all in one command, which doesn't fit in with the using a tag as a > vote idea. I'll update the JIRA issue to not use -r active-platform flag. > > Joe - I just pushed a change that adds a --pretend flag to the tag-release > command. Probably should have had this from the start to ensure it's doing > the right thing. > > Can you post your log, and also tell me the output of running "git > symbolic-ref --short HEAD" from cordova-js? > > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:23 PM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Coho does introduce a change in the process, because instead of all >> the platform maintainers tagging their code, we have one person >> tagging everything. If a tag is the vote, this is stuffing the ballot >> box. It's bad enough that we can vote twice. >> >> Now, I'm personally OK with us decoupling automation from the rest of >> the process, but right now I'm not OK with tagging this release. >> Also, I'm having some issues with tagging the existing cordova-js, >> whenever I try and use the cordova tool, I keep getting an error about >> it not being on a named branch: >> >> /Users/jbowser/cordova-coho/coho:488 >> throw new Error('Aborted due to repo ' + shjs.pwd() + ' not being >> on a >> ^ >> Error: Aborted due to repo /Users/jbowser/cordova-js not being on a named >> branch >> at retrieveCurrentBranchName (/Users/jbowser/cordova-coho/coho:488:15) >> at /Users/jbowser/cordova-coho/coho:778:9 >> at /Users/jbowser/cordova-coho/coho:290:9 >> at Array.forEach (native) >> at forEachRepo (/Users/jbowser/cordova-coho/coho:281:11) >> at updateRepos (/Users/jbowser/cordova-coho/coho:776:5) >> at Object.prepareReleaseBranchCommand [as entryPoint] >> (/Users/jbowser/cordova-coho/coho:898:5) >> at main (/Users/jbowser/cordova-coho/coho:1118:25) >> at Object.<anonymous> (/Users/jbowser/cordova-coho/coho:1120:1) >> at Module._compile (module.js:456:26) >> >> Are there additional steps that we need to do to get this to work? >> >> Finally, can we not change how we do things until after the 3.0 >> release is out? I'm really not liking all these proposed changes to >> both our process and APIs at the 11th hour. There's some good ideas >> here, but this is slowing things down considerably. >> >> Joe >> >> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Andrew Grieve <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Coho introduces no change in process, but it does automate some steps of >> > the existing process. >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 6:51 PM, Brian LeRoux <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> Yes. The idea would be, as it always has been, the platform >> >> maintainers tag as their "vote". That tag says, 'hey this part is >> >> tested, stable, and works'. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > So, we're using coho for tagging everything now? That seems like a >> >> > major process change. >> >> > >> >> > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 7:10 AM, Andrew Grieve <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> Created Release bug: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-3981 >> >> >> >> >> >> Please update the subtasks if I've missed any steps. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:06 PM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> Sgtm! >> >> >>> >> >> >>> On 6/21/13 6:27 PM, "Steven Gill" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >I say we begin the tagging process for 2.9.0 final on Monday. That >> >> gives >> >> >>> >us >> >> >>> >a couple of days to get everything tested, tagged and released >> before >> >> the >> >> >>> >end of the month. We can also merge in 3.0.0 branches after the 2.9 >> >> >>> >release. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>
