\o/ On Oct 3, 2013 2:40 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <[email protected]> wrote:
> WOOOOHOOOOO! > > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Steven Gill <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I have temporarily set the download back to dist.apache.org. I will > change > > it once our stuff gets mirrored. > > > > Doap file updated. > > > > Only thing remaining is to fix docs redirect (only Michael B can do this > > and he is in Europe) > > Close Issue > > > > > > Great job on this release everyone. Not an easy one! > > > > -Steve > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Steven Gill <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > The apache mirrors haven't picked up 3.1.0 zip yet. Making it a little > > > harder to get out on our site. > > > > > > Feel free to RT the release tweet. > > > https://twitter.com/apachecordova/status/385523954724507648 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Steven Gill <[email protected] > > >wrote: > > > > > >> Sounds good. Also updating download links to point to 3.1.0 instead of > > >> 3.0.0 > > >> > > >> > > >> On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 2:48 PM, Andrew Grieve <[email protected] > > >wrote: > > >> > > >>> Blog post is live. > > >>> http://cordova.apache.org/blog/releases/2013/10/02/cordova-31.html > > >>> > > >>> Final steps: > > >>> Tweet the post (steve) > > >>> Update DOAP file with .zip release (steve) > > >>> Update the docs.cordova.io redirect (Michael B) > > >>> Mark as released in JIRA ( > > >>> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/project-config/CB/versions > > >>> ) > > >>> (steve) > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 10:03 PM, Steven Gill <[email protected] > > > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> > Release is being uploaded as I type this email. > > >>> > > > >>> > Andrew, feel free to post the blog + update the site to say 3.1.0! > > >>> > > > >>> > Woot! > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Shazron <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >>> > > > >>> > > I don't think Apache is breaking Git, it's just git. This has > > >>> happened > > >>> > > before, where I commented on the ML about a tag that had the > tagged > > >>> > commit > > >>> > > missing from any of the branches (I believe it was from a tag > from > > >>> Tim, > > >>> > not > > >>> > > calling you out here Tim, but just for precedence purposes as a > > >>> concrete > > >>> > > example for this current issue). > > >>> > > > > >>> > > I hadn't updated my local cordova-android repo since yesterday. I > > see > > >>> > that > > >>> > > a commit by Joe Bowser with subject "Tagging 3.1.0" with > > >>> > > hash 6f17e9fc9cd27f031d94d67fe118008d5f6ec5b3 - this was from the > > >>> 3.1.0 > > >>> > > tag. I searched using git for any local or remote branches (my > last > > >>> > Apache > > >>> > > fetch) and it did not contain the commit. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > $ git branch --contains 6f17e9fc9cd27f031d94d67fe118008d5f6ec5b3 > > (for > > >>> > local > > >>> > > branches) > > >>> > > $ git branch -a --contains > 6f17e9fc9cd27f031d94d67fe118008d5f6ec5b3 > > >>> (for > > >>> > > remote branches) > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Thus, when someone pulled down the 3.1.x branch, it did not > contain > > >>> your > > >>> > > commit. I assume, based on looking at the 3.1.x branch, and not > > >>> seeing it > > >>> > > tagged, that person then tagged it, and it appeared that your > > commit > > >>> was > > >>> > > removed. The evidence strongly suggests otherwise, imo. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > I have zipped up my local repo and can provide it to anyone if > they > > >>> want > > >>> > to > > >>> > > take a look. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Andrew Grieve < > > >>> [email protected]> > > >>> > > > wrote: > > >>> > > > > Sorry, was away from my computer for a while there. > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > Joe, sounds like what happened was that you pushed the tag > > >>> without > > >>> > > > pushing > > >>> > > > > the branch. That has happened a few times in the past by > others > > >>> > > > (including > > >>> > > > > myself). No biggie. The ASF repos disable git push --force, > so > > I > > >>> > don't > > >>> > > > > think it's even possible for tampering to happen. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > I want github back! Apache is breaking git. :( > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > As far as tampering, it's totally possible for it to happen. > > >>> Sadly, > > >>> > > > it looks exactly like this. I apologize for getting super > aggro > > >>> about > > >>> > > > the git screw-up. > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
