cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ian Clelland <iclell...@google.com>
Subject Re: Mobile-Spec contains Cordova 2.7 tests
Date Fri, 05 Apr 2013 19:05:38 GMT
I don't have any problem with CB-2226 going out with 2.6.0, if it can; it
was just in the list of commits that were made after the branch point.

If you can get the 2226 fix into 2.6, then by all means do it :) And then
the mobile-spec test for it can go in as well

Ian


On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org> wrote:

> 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