From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 460B7203EA for ; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 08:49:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752706AbcLJItP (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Dec 2016 03:49:15 -0500 Received: from mail-io0-f176.google.com ([209.85.223.176]:36859 "EHLO mail-io0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752030AbcLJItO (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Dec 2016 03:49:14 -0500 Received: by mail-io0-f176.google.com with SMTP id a81so88990117ioe.3 for ; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 00:49:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=x0bZYPunD9BXomleTxOZvDJGUuDxYgmSQMZAUjcwSak=; b=BeKKX8k1CNhdVJcia7zzYimVYZ0lfSSFiTy6b26dOTNU3TUPQMoxz3jTkeL6AWUhm9 ND4/4yJ/c45A5hvDfF7q1pu0YFMEsgBXud16pCFs7eQQlhqIpRQNwgbRgcXmfMBFoMHH aW4RIHgVPEF140J3CL61af8dJ4MOkfyFCe9S7hWO7kYl50HLOUgoNj+zweAzA3NNLFh7 aRPw8v7a2WwjutMby+927cdX3NmgCdjq3w6sNUD5/uaOBA4+04TaazrJ2o0d6XRlz2nL alFG650rzUHFTpHiOlPJewynbVHDv5y59qJ/6BcZbh0DsMir3DtHfU3osibN6AjQOV0F 76jg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=x0bZYPunD9BXomleTxOZvDJGUuDxYgmSQMZAUjcwSak=; b=JScAo95ZnTYqyompZNjPi3mbBrvxfs6fbJmjpR51MnPJtImeATZjDB2UfBhfn9EyTA gB1dPw8/C+h4ftDWROxDRlh6cWE+WyWuh1PodMWsQWT02ZVs1Svczye6UAKjavYXFwvo eXiSQs/8T1QA80av9hTzSaQ+L7meee9LDOZ7/HY/3qkLotLqATFXO4HMXEo1Awak8L0E 21Kk1a/b2TT6PFHy/zwWI18YVihidGIR4jjLj3eIZoi48fV4OmLc0A9tWOQD6eh3xmlX kGOsOmkcGEado7umXjX77659rn6ZjaovYutpG9KvWzW80LtjZkn6EyCKMO6y/XfmbF74 S4xQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC00xgzXqA1/YhHri7DuxKok8QYb6mVFA84UsZVJfHSQV5wNtc0JW47set8TdoDnzsrXMQSQDxr/T+CA3vg== X-Received: by 10.107.200.204 with SMTP id y195mr69367745iof.73.1481359753839; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 00:49:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.79.0.93 with HTTP; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 00:49:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20161209091127.sxxczhfslrqsqs3m@sigill.intra.peff.net> From: Chris Packham Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 21:49:13 +1300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Any interest in 'git merge --continue' as a command To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Jeff King , GIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 8:16 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > >>> 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). > > If we were to have "merge --continue", I agree that it would be the > logical implementation. > > There is nothing to "continue" in a stopped merge where Git asked > for help from the user, and because of that, I view the final "git > commit" as "concluding the merge", not "continuing". "continue" > makes quite a lot of sense with rebase and cherry-pick A..B that > stopped; it concludes the current step and let it continue to > process the remainder. So from that point of view, it somewhat > feels strange to call it "merge --continue", but it probably is just > me. > Yeah I did think that --continue wasn't quite the right word. git merge --conclude would probably be the most accurate.