Thanks Steve, the problem was my use of "git show-ref 3.4.0" which is
specifically looking for that tag.  I forgot about the cad+sem versioning
of cli (woops).

I am doing this now :/

coho --repo cadence foreach "git tag" | grep -e "Executing" -e "3.4.0" |
grep -v "rc"
./cordova-android/ =========== Executing: git tag
3.4.0
./cordova-ios/ =============== Executing: git tag
3.4.0
./cordova-blackberry/ ======== Executing: git tag
3.4.0
./cordova-windows/ =========== Executing: git tag
3.4.0
./cordova-wp8/ =============== Executing: git tag
3.4.0
./cordova-firefoxos/ ========= Executing: git tag
3.4.0
./cordova-ubuntu/ ============ Executing: git tag
3.4.0
./cordova-amazon-fireos/ ===== Executing: git tag
3.4.0
./cordova-cli/ =============== Executing: git tag
3.4.0-0.1.0
./cordova-js/ ================ Executing: git tag
3.4.0
./cordova-mobile-spec/ ======= Executing: git tag
3.4.0
./cordova-app-hello-world/ === Executing: git tag
3.4.0
./cordova-docs/ ============== Executing: git tag
3.4.0



On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Steven Gill <stevengil...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Michal,
>
> The CLI has the tag 3.4.0-0.1.0.  Are you sure you fetched the latest tags?
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
>
> > (I was wrong about firefoxos, its just cli thats missing the tag)
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
> >
> > > C'mon Joe, its our job to help him. You can take the high road and then
> > > Sebb can start affording us the same courtesy.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Seriously, you can't find that yourself? You clearly know nothing
> > > > about this project.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 7:30 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > On 20 February 2014 14:47, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > >> SCM == ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Source Code / Software Configuration   Management
> > > > >
> > > > >> Do you mean the git tags?
> > > > >> All of the repositories are tagged with the version number of the
> > > > release.
> > > > >> So, "3.4.0" is the tag.
> > > > >
> > > > > OK, so where are the repos then please?
> > > > > Also, if the tag is not immutable, it would help to have the hash.
> > > > >
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 9:02 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> On 18 February 2014 23:26, Steven Gill <stevengil...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >>> > Please review and vote on the Cordova 3.4.0 release.
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > You can find the sample release at
> > > http://people.apache.org/~steven/
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> At the risk of being flamed, I am concerned that the VOTE mail
> does
> > > > >>> not include a link to the SCM tag.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Why is this important?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> The ASF releases source files which come with a LICENSE (and
> > NOTICE).
> > > > >>> It is vital that the release only contains files that are
> permitted
> > > to
> > > > >>> be distributed, and we aren't accidentally including files that
> > > should
> > > > >>> not be distributed.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Equally, it is important that the source release is not missing
> any
> > > > >>> required files.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> The only practical way to check all the files is to compare the
> > > source
> > > > >>> archive against the tag(s) it is supposed to contain.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> In theory, an automated build process will ensure that the
> archive
> > > > >>> only contains files from the tag, and does not omit any require
> > > files.
> > > > >>> However, in practice, the archives are built from workspaces that
> > > > >>> contain other files (e.g. compilation output).
> > > > >>> I know of at least two projects which used standard automated
> > > > >>> procedures (Maven), yet their source releases contained files
> that
> > > > >>> should not have been released.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Should there be a complaint, it's important that the PMC can show
> > > that
> > > > >>> due diligence was done in checking the source archive contents.
> > > > >>> This will be easier to prove if the VOTE thread contains details
> of
> > > > >>> the SCM tags from which the archive was built.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> The SCM repo provides traceability of provenance.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> So please can someone provide the SCM tag(s) that were used to
> > create
> > > > >>> the source release?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> > Voting will go on for 24 hours.
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > Cheers,
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > -Steve
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to