Re: git cherry-pick --continue?

On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 02:21:14PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Hmm. I was thinking "am" was the odd man out, but really there are only
two sequencer commands that I noted: rebase and am. So you could perhaps
argue that rebase should also learn "--resolved". Or am I forgetting
one?

Having said all I did in the previous message, I think "am --continue"
would be a good addition.

OK. I agree with your philosophical ramblings in the previous message,
but I also think there is some value in making it simple for the user to
remember.

Do you just want to pick up my patch from earlier in the thread, or do
you have further comments? The only thing I could think to change would
be that we may not want to even bother advertising --continue in the
usage message (conversely, we could go a step further and actually
advertise it in the manpage).

And "rebase --resolved" would not make any sense if the reason the control
is given back to you was because you ran "rebase -i" and marked a commit
to be "edit"ed.  Of course, we could add "--resolved" and "--edited" (or
perhaps "--amended") to "rebase", and have it make sure that the correct
one is given.  For example, when it stopped for "edit", it would reject
"rebase --resolved".  But I do not think it is worth the hassle.

Agreed.

-Peff