Re: [PATCH 1/2] Introduce CHERRY_PICK_HEAD

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 6:13 AM, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy [off-list ref] wrote:

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Jay Soffian [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

When a cherry-pick conflicts git advises to use:

 $ git commit -c <original commit id>

to preserve the original commit message and authorship. Instead, let's
record the original commit id in CHERRY_PICK_HEAD and advise to use:

 $ git commit -c CHERRY_PICK_HEAD

Wouldn't it be more convenient to do "git cherry-pick --continue"
instead of "git commit -c CHERRY_PICK_HEAD"?

As mentioned in the part of the commit message you trimmed away: "In
the next commit, we teach git to handle the '-c CHERRY_PICK_HEAD'
part". Now, you may ask, why use "git commit" after resolving the
conflict (a la merge) instead of "git cherry-pick --continue" (a la
rebase).

I addressed this in the previous thread, see
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/166884

j.