From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] reset: add option "--merge-safe" to "git reset" Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:38:15 +0200 Message-ID: <4AB1D957.20902@viscovery.net> References: <20090917040835.4048.51057.chriscool@tuxfamily.org> <20090917041440.4048.16353.chriscool@tuxfamily.org> <7vk4zykv7o.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Schindelin , Stephan Beyer , Daniel Barkalow , Jakub Narebski , Linus Torvalds To: Junio C Hamano , Christian Couder X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Sep 17 08:38:26 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MoAdN-0007eD-Ac for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:38:25 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755486AbZIQGiQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Sep 2009 02:38:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754743AbZIQGiP (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Sep 2009 02:38:15 -0400 Received: from lilzmailso02.liwest.at ([212.33.55.13]:24501 "EHLO lilzmailso02.liwest.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754718AbZIQGiP (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Sep 2009 02:38:15 -0400 Received: from cpe228-254.liwest.at ([81.10.228.254] helo=linz.eudaptics.com) by lilzmailso02.liwest.at with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MoAdD-000144-Vm; Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:38:16 +0200 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (J6T.linz.viscovery [192.168.1.95]) by linz.eudaptics.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7525BC81; Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:38:15 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) In-Reply-To: <7vk4zykv7o.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano schrieb: > As we established in the previous round, this is _different_ from --merge, > but *not* in the sense that --merge is more dangerous and users should be > using this new option instead, but in the sense that --merge perfectly > works well for its intended use case, and this new option triggers a mode > of operation that is meant to be used in a completely different use case, > which is unspecified in this series without documentation. > > In that light, is --merge-safe still a good name for the option, or merely > a misleading one? Do I understand this correctly? (1) The intended use-case of --merge is to "reset _a_ merge". (2) The intended use-case of --merge-safe is to point the branch head to a different commit, but to carry the changes that currently are in the index and wd over to the new commit, similar to checkout --merge. I had mistaken that --merge actually performs (2) because of the striking similarity of the option's name to checkout's --merge. So, IMHO, whatever the new option is named that performs (2) - it introduces an inconsistency, because --merge is already taken. -- Hannes