cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Cordova 2.9.0 Final
Date Tue, 25 Jun 2013 18:52:54 GMT
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 <agrieve@chromium.org> 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 <bowserj@gmail.com> 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 <agrieve@chromium.org>
>> 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 <b@brian.io> 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 <bowserj@gmail.com> 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 <agrieve@chromium.org>
>> >> 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 <fil@adobe.com>
wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> Sgtm!
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> On 6/21/13 6:27 PM, "Steven Gill" <stevengill97@gmail.com>
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.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >>
>>

Mime
View raw message