Honestly, I would rather have merge commits in the repo than start screwing with the history of the repo with a rebase. Re-writing history is a big Apache no-no.
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Andrew Grieve <[email protected]> wrote: > A couple git tips that I learned recently: > > git pull --rebase will eliminate merge commits that are due to pulling when > a local commit has been made. > > If you failed to --rebase and have a merge commit: > > git rebase origin/master (assuming you're on master) will reorder your > commits to make your local ones come after remote ones, and also eliminate > the merge commit. > > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 7:13 PM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I pushed to the 2.9.0 branch, but someone snuck a commit in on run. I >> then decided to re-tag it, since this is a script change, and not >> anything that required re-testing. >> >> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Andrew Grieve <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Hey Joe - not sure what happened, but would love to know what errors >> you're >> > now seeing. >> > >> > Looks like the tagging of Android didn't go quite right: >> > >> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cordova-android.git;a=log;h=df1536ea77e97b7d362a19582f8beddd168c5ec3 >> > >> > There shouldn't be a merge commit (I don't think anyways), and the tag >> > points past the branch head. Did you forget to push the 2.9.x branch? >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 6:41 PM, Steven Gill <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> Hey All, >> >> >> >> I would really appreciate if we could get the tags rolling. I am heading >> >> out for nodeconf on Thursday and want to get the release out tomorrow >> >> before I leave. Are there any issues holding people back from tagging? >> >> Android is the only platform tagged so far. >> >> >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-3981 >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> -Steve >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> > I'm now getting even worse errors with coho. I've fully abandoned >> >> > using that tool for this release and I'm tagging everything the old >> >> > fashioned way. We should create tickets for each of the platform >> >> > maintainers to tag their releases so we can get this rolling. >> >> > >> >> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Andrew Grieve <[email protected] >> > >> >> > wrote: >> >> > > The tool logs most of the commands that it executes, it prints out >> >> stack >> >> > > traces when it fails, and you can step through the code using >> >> > > node_inspector. Do you have any suggestions on how to make it >> easier to >> >> > > debug? >> >> > > >> >> > > If you don't have a --short, then that would certainly be the >> problem. >> >> > > Perhaps your git version is older than mine and that flag was a new >> >> > > addition? I just pushed a change to not use --short. >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > > >> >> > >> 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. >> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >>
