cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org>
Subject Re: Mobile-Spec contains Cordova 2.7 tests
Date Fri, 05 Apr 2013 18:58:51 GMT
Yeah I learned that one today, too (thanks Ian/Braden)


On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> 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" <mmocny@chromium.org> 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 <fil@adobe.com> 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" <shazron@gmail.com> 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
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message