Re: Any interest in 'git merge --continue' as a command

[Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@gmail.com>]

On December 9, 2016 1:11:27 AM PST, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 08:57:58PM +1300, Chris Packham wrote:
>
>> I hit this at $dayjob recently.
>> 
>> A developer had got themselves into a confused state when needing to
>> resolve a merge conflict.
>> 
>> They knew about git rebase --continue (and git am and git
>cherry-pick)
>> but they were unsure how to "continue" a merge (it didn't help that
>> the advice saying to use 'git commit' was scrolling off the top of
>the
>> terminal). I know that using 'git commit' has been the standard way
>to
>> complete a merge but given other commands have a --continue should
>> merge have it as well?
>
>It seems like that would be in line with 35d2fffdb (Provide 'git merge
>--abort' as a synonym to 'git reset --merge', 2010-11-09), whose stated
>goal was providing consistency with other multi-command operations.
>
>I assume it would _just_ run a vanilla "git commit", and not try to do
>any trickery with updating the index (which could be disastrous).
>
>-Peff

This makes sense to me.

Thanks,
Jake