Sergey Organov [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
To put it a bit differently, I share with you that picking merges
should be deliberate and it is safer to make sure allowing it only
when the told us that s/he knows the commit being picked is a merge,
Something like "--[no-]ban-merges" then [*], having "--ban-merges" as
default?
quoted
but when we started allowing "-m 1" for non-merge commits in the
current world where cherry-pick can work on a range, the ship has
already sailed.
Except that it could be a different ship, provided we've got
"--ban-merges". Having "-m 1" as default stops to be an issue, and
explicit "-m 1" could then imply --no-ban-merges, that could be in turn
overwritten by explicit "--ban-merges", if necessary.
The same effect can be had by just reverting "let's allow -m1 for
single-parent commit", can't it? That is a far simpler solution, I
would say.