cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jesse <purplecabb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Cordova CLI merge, new branch, INFRA ticket
Date Wed, 29 May 2013 00:07:47 GMT
What is the resolution on this?

My opinion: History is in the past, move on.
I think it's okay if it is history is messy, or even if has a few duplicate
commits.  Tangles and all.


@purplecabbage
risingj.com


On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 7:05 AM, Braden Shepherdson <braden@chromium.org>wrote:

> I think so, but only if we're prepared to keep the tangled history and
> duplicate about 30 commits. Several mistakes were made with the branching
> and rebasing of things on master, and there's a lot of duplication and
> confusion in the history.
>
> When you get in this morning, I can show you the whiteboard diagram of the
> long version above, and then you can look at the histories of master and
> master2 on GitX. I think you'll agree it's worth moving forward with
> master2.
>
> Braden
>
>
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:16 PM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org
> >wrote:
>
> > Could we merge master2 into master with:
> >
> > git merge --strategy-option=theirs master2
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:19 PM, Braden Shepherdson <braden@chromium.org
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > tl;dr version: cordova-cli now has a master2 branch that should be
> > treated
> > > as master going forward. DO NOT use master or future anymore.
> > >
> > > Short version:
> > >
> > > - I tried to merge future and master.
> > > - I couldn't because the history is a train wreck. The morbidly curious
> > > should see [2].
> > > - Ian and I dug through the history, and played CSI until we figured
> out
> > > what had happened, and found a sensible way to reconstruct a sane
> master
> > > branch.
> > > - This branch merged fairly neatly with future.
> > > - It is now committed as the new branch master2.
> > > - The original master branch is deprecated.
> > > - I have filed an INFRA ticket[1] to get them to point HEAD at master2,
> > and
> > > delete the old master branch.
> > > - Use master2 from now on. DO NOT touch the old master or future
> branches
> > > anymore.
> > >
> > > I'll keep the list updated on the state of the INFRA ticket.
> > >
> > > Braden
> > >
> > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-6302
> > >
> > > [2] Long version:
> > >
> > > A long time ago, I forked cli's master to create future. I committed a
> > > half-dozen changes or so. Sometime later, a 2.7.x branch was forked
> /from
> > > future/. Several changes were made here. Later it was merged back in,
> /to
> > > master/. The same changes were later rebased onto master and committed
> > > again, duplicating them. Then this branch was merged with master again,
> > > creating a /third/ copy of the changes originally from this 2.7.x
> branch.
> > >
> > > Meanwhile, some of the changes from future were reverted by hand (as
> > > opposed to with git revert) in master.
> > >
> > > Finally some new changes were made to future and master. It looks,
> > > according to git, like there are only these changes on the future
> branch,
> > > since the earlier ones were merged by accident some time ago.
> > >
> > > When I came along and tried to merge master and future in either
> > direction,
> > > or rebase in either direction, those older future changes stayed
> deleted,
> > > because according to git they were made on the same branch.
> > >
> > > Moral of the story: Don't take a branch off master (like future), fork
> > it,
> > > commit to it, and then merge it back to master. That's what started
> most
> > of
> > > the insanity, because now future is partially merged into master even
> > > though it's not being treated that way.
> > >
> > > I need a drink.
> > >
> >
>

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