Closed Bug 897559 Opened 12 years ago Closed 12 years ago

Use |repo manifest| to parse manifest in gonk-misc/add-revision.py

Categories

(Firefox OS Graveyard :: General, defect)

ARM
Gonk (Firefox OS)
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: diego, Assigned: diego)

References

Details

Attachments

(1 file, 1 obsolete file)

This is easier to maintain and parses some elements that were being ignored like "remove-project".
gonk-misc PR coming up
Attached file Pull request (obsolete) —
Attachment #780554 - Flags: review?(mwu)
Comment on attachment 780554 [details] Pull request jhford, what do you think? I don't know our build infra well enough to know if this would risk breaking things.
Attachment #780554 - Flags: review?(mwu) → review?(jhford)
Comment on attachment 780554 [details] Pull request This looks great! R- because this will break local developer builds. You are hardcoding to use a copy of repo available in the path. This might be okay for releng machines but almost all developers are using the copy of repo that we install to the b2g_root, outside the path. The exception that a developer gets is pretty cryptic because python's subprocess module doesn't like to say which file could not be found when it fails to start the program. I tested with a simple patch to make sure that the everything works locally. https://github.com/jhford/gonk-misc/commit/b346d235f48d57c8b512c20987be400b41f6d9ff You're welcome to use that commit or come up with something better, but please squash the commits.
Attachment #780554 - Flags: review?(jhford) → review-
(squash the related commits)
Assignee: nobody → dwilson
Comment on attachment 780554 [details] Pull request Hi jhford, Thanks for your help! I squashed your patch into my PR. Please take another look.
Attachment #780554 - Flags: review- → review?(jhford)
Oh, did you mean I should squash the revert of bug 890065 as well? If so, I think it's clearer as an individual revert commit.
(In reply to Diego Wilson [:diego] from comment #7) > Oh, did you mean I should squash the revert of bug 890065 as well? If so, I > think it's clearer as an individual revert commit. nope, just the fix. Merging now.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Awesome possum, thanks!
jhford, This works fine for me locally. Any idea what's the source of the bustage?
Flags: needinfo?(jhford)
My apologies. The bustage turned out to be a different cause than this bug. My apologies for the churn :(
Flags: needinfo?(jhford)
(In reply to Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM UTC-4] from comment #14) > My apologies. The bustage turned out to be a different cause than this bug. > My apologies for the churn :( No worries. What's the best way to un-revert?
Flags: needinfo?(ryanvm)
Re-land?
Flags: needinfo?(ryanvm)
Attached file Reland pull request
Carry forward r=jhford from PR
Attachment #780554 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #787308 - Flags: review+
Keywords: checkin-needed
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago12 years ago
Keywords: checkin-needed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Depends on: 904978
See Also: → 904978
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: