cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org>
Subject Re: CLI's master2
Date Wed, 10 Jul 2013 13:09:29 GMT
Done. master2 is no more.

$ git show pre-3.0-history
tag pre-3.0-history
Tagger: Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org>
Date:   Wed Jul 10 09:04:03 2013 -0400

Convert master2 to a tag.

This tag should be used to refer to the history of commits / blame for
changes that pre-date 3.0 (approximately).

We had a series of bad merges on the master branch, which resulted in a
"master2" branch being created to hold a proper history. However, it was
too confusing in the end to have everyone use "master2", so we copy &
pasted "master2" back



On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Carlos Santana <csantana23@gmail.com> wrote:

> I say history for cli and git blame starts on July 19 2013 :-)
>
> just kidding.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> > Carlos, the merge we did from master2->master was just one nasty commit
> > with the full diff applied, without merging the actually tree history
> > (since the merge was not clean, long story, but we tried to preserve
> > history without success).
> >
> > So, if you want to see any individual commits done between when
> cordova-cli
> > 3.0.0 branched away from master and was merged back in, you have to use
> the
> > master2 branch.  I think likely the manifestation of this issue will be
> > when doing a git blame, many lines of code are attributed to the merge
> > commit done by Andrew (thats how he gets his commit counts up ;)
> >
> > Tagging and deleting the branch sounds like a great option.
> >
> > -Michal
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Carlos Santana <csantana23@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I'm not 100% sure what you guys mean by "post-merge pre-3.0"
> > >
> > > But in general tagging is very useful to mark a hash, and to go back
> and
> > > find it with a useful name.
> > >
> > > Since you merged master2 into master, all history lives in master now.
> > >
> > > if you want to create a branch in the future you can always create a
> > branch
> > > using the tag, so master2 branch can always be re-created if deleted.
> > >
> > > So you can tag master2 at the hash point 11dd24e
> > > | | * 11dd24e (origin/master2) removed ripple documentation for now.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.evernote.com/shard/s34/sh/f75ae07c-24df-44a0-bb1e-71b6ebebc14f/2699c036c09176f33b0229ecc7e52e19
> > >
> > > --Carlos
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yep, great idea (tagging vs branch)
> > > >
> > > > I think post-merge pre-3.0 history will exist only on master branch
> > > > regardless of tag vs branch. confirm?
> > > >
> > > > I've removed bb10RemovePrompt, future, future-bb10.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Benn Mapes <benn.mapes@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I like Carlos' idea of tagging master2 and deleting it.
> > > > >
> > > > > This cleans up the branches so no-one will mistakenly commit to it,
> > but
> > > > > also preserves the history and we can add a message to the tag
> > > explaining
> > > > > what it was used for and why it was deleted.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>
wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Agree with Andrew, rename the branch to pre-3.0-history
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 7/9/13 10:45 AM, "Carlos Santana" <csantana23@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >I propose to kill master 2 branch, and instead use a tag
> > > > > "pre-3.0-history"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Andrew Grieve <
> > agrieve@chromium.org
> > > >
> > > > > > >wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Good idea. Let's comment on which ones can be removed.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Carlos Santana <
> > > > csantana23@gmail.com
> > > > > > >> >wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > Deleting some abandon branches might be a good
cleanup
> > exercise,
> > > > and
> > > > > > >>make
> > > > > > >> > it clear to use 'master'
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > - master2
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> This we should keep around since it has a sane history.
Let's
> > > rename
> > > > > it
> > > > > > >> though. Maybe to "pre-3.0-history"
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > - future
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> This can be removed.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > - lazy
> > > > > > >> > - merges
> > > > > > >> > - bb10RemovePrompt
> > > > > > >> > - future-bb10
> > > > > > >> > - dependencies
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> This was merged and can be removed.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > Thanks Andrew!
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > Ian, will do.
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > On 7/5/13 8:14 AM, "Ian Clelland" <iclelland@google.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > >Doh. I *just* submitted a pull req against
master2.
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > >Fil -- let me know if you have any problems
with it, and
> > I'll
> > > > > > >>resubmit
> > > > > > >> > as
> > > > > > >> > > >necessary.
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > >On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Andrew
Grieve
> > > > > > >><agrieve@chromium.org>
> > > > > > >> > > >wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > >> Okay, I made master look like master2,
but the commit
> log
> > > is
> > > > > > >> > essentially
> > > > > > >> > > >> lost. Have not removed master2.
> > > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > >>         git rm -r .
> > > > > > >> > > >>         git checkout --theirs master2
-- .
> > > > > > >> > > >>         git commit -a
> > > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > >> Maybe lets now go back to committing
to master, and
> keep
> > > > > master2
> > > > > > >> > around
> > > > > > >> > > >>for
> > > > > > >> > > >> history's sake?
> > > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > >> On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 1:22 PM,
Michal Mocny
> > > > > > >><mmocny@chromium.org>
> > > > > > >> > > >>wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > >> > (small correction, next was
actually called future).
> > > > > > >> > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > >> > Also, I don't see any work
being done on master.
> > > > > > >> > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > >> > On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 1:18
PM, Michal Mocny
> > > > > > >><mmocny@chromium.org
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > >> > > If master is in use, then
I think that is a
> mistake.
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > >> > > As far as I'm aware, master
branch should be "dead"
> > > > right?
> > > > > > >>We
> > > > > > >> > had a
> > > > > > >> > > >> > > 'next' branch that was
for 3.0 work which diverged
> > from
> > > > > > >>master
> > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > >> > > >>the
> > > > > > >> > > >> > > merge back was not clean
(for various reasons),
> hence
> > > we
> > > > > > >> > > >>"temporarily"
> > > > > > >> > > >> > went
> > > > > > >> > > >> > > with a master2 until we
could just "overwrite"
> > master.
> > > > >  Since
> > > > > > >> that
> > > > > > >> > > >> seems
> > > > > > >> > > >> > to
> > > > > > >> > > >> > > not be possible, Andrew
is suggesting we go ahead
> > with
> > > > the
> > > > > > >>not
> > > > > > >> > clean
> > > > > > >> > > >> > merge
> > > > > > >> > > >> > > (history may look awkward),
but do away with this
> > > > > ridiculous
> > > > > > >> > > >>situation.
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > >> > > Did I summarize that right?
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at
1:01 PM, Brian LeRoux <
> > > b@brian.io
> > > > >
> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> So, what is the difference
between master and
> > master2?
> > > > > Right
> > > > > > >> now,
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> master from what I
understand is in heavy use w/
> > > tonnes
> > > > of
> > > > > > >>bugs
> > > > > > >> > and
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> fixes.
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >>
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> On Thu, Jul 4, 2013
at 9:52 AM, Ian Clelland <
> > > > > > >> > iclelland@google.com
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> > We've had that
ticket open for some time now,
> and
> > > > Braden
> > > > > > >>has
> > > > > > >> > > >>tried
> > > > > > >> > > >> on
> > > > > > >> > > >> > a
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> > couple of occasions
to get some movement on it,
> > but
> > > > > > >>there's
> > > > > > >> > been
> > > > > > >> > > >>no
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> action
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> > so far.
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> > On Thu, Jul 4,
2013 at 12:34 PM, Filip Maj <
> > > > > fil@adobe.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> >> If you want
to give it a shot, go for it!
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> >> Didn't we
have an INFRA issue filed for them to
> > > move
> > > > > the
> > > > > > >> > master
> > > > > > >> > > >> HEAD
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> >> pointer to
master2 and fix this for us? :P
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> >> On 7/4/13
9:23 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <
> > > > > agrieve@chromium.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> >> >I feel
that having master2 around is now
> causing
> > > us
> > > > > more
> > > > > > >> harm
> > > > > > >> > > >>than
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> would
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> >> >be
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> >> >done
if we just merged it into master. I'd
> like
> > to
> > > > > > >>merge it
> > > > > > >> > > >>into
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> master,
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> >> >delete
master2, and move on.
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >>
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > --
> > > > > > >> > Carlos Santana
> > > > > > >> > <csantana23@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >--
> > > > > > >Carlos Santana
> > > > > > ><csantana23@gmail.com>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlos Santana
> > > <csantana23@gmail.com>
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Carlos Santana
> <csantana23@gmail.com>
>

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