[Pulp-dev] do we have master branch screwed up?

[Bihan Zhang]

Ina I think the problem with both of those is that the committer (you and
me) did not merge forward before the release engineer called the
update-version-and-merge-forward.py script.

update-version-and-merge-forward.py does the merge with ours strategy[0]
(to keep the correct release version on forward merge); so it brings the
merge commit over but does not keep the changes.

I am not sure how to move forward in this case- should we just cherry pick
the commits back into master? what are your thoughts pcreech?

[0]
https://github.com/pulp/pulp_packaging/blob/master/ci/lib/promote.py#L243

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Ina Panova <ipanova at redhat.com> wrote:

> Today i accidentally stumbled across some inconsistencies on pulp/pulp
> master branch while looking into some Nectar related stuff
>
> 1) master branch has the commit ab277d4f9c11cb539ed82236881621962b8ef721
> in the git history
> 2) git blame or git history of the file itself does not show anything, the
> code change is not on master.
> 3) 2.-14dev branch which was branched from master does contains the commit
> and the code changes.
>
> Same for f36a5b96ad60d594cc875faf0ce395d80d63ac75 which is the fix for
> #2783, i cannot see the code changes on master branch.
>
> Is there any black magic happening again?
>
>
> --------
> Regards,
>
> Ina Panova
> Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.
>
> "Do not go where the path may lead,
>  go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20170907/682a6394/attachment.htm>