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=-5.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, 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 2EC511FC96 for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2016 18:07:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753058AbcLISHE (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Dec 2016 13:07:04 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:58629 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752184AbcLISHD (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Dec 2016 13:07:03 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C878566E2; Fri, 9 Dec 2016 13:07:02 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=wUW6DHZGrtSa+8JAf0El+PbRlRc=; b=IXOdKQ 4BCY7br85or+JhyqL9/LK4pYcBO3T0wxJOGKPInnw/7vDHQ8GOcZhp95LL7wYXD7 RrKmIKMOrIkzeHppUfoOhjrzNivLXjUCFXwFjv4Ngjc4uVBqPqfuivmrkFgZJnyF c5S5WzbvSAoPMIb4OBnJUG6vHY9NFf+nSu6YQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=gARIx4QsURCcsBV2v4bIPsqcatwDkMhY PcWcMp8yJk3gBqeTZFA+s+Gzf4/N60qN2IBreuHr4NZMdum6HjKhr48VaB0s0rxn 3OvOXDb1WKezRAp6ZsBoZaYfQuLStGp6k2ZQPLVtmgCFZMHI8Md1dVmVa7Q3E2i6 tAXcPyF7Zbg= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A1E4566E1; Fri, 9 Dec 2016 13:07:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B99A3566DE; Fri, 9 Dec 2016 13:07:01 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Duy Nguyen Cc: Stephan Beyer , Git Mailing List , Christian Couder , SZEDER =?utf-8?Q?G=C3=A1bor?= Subject: Re: BUG: "cherry-pick A..B || git reset --hard OTHER" References: <6facca6e-622a-ea8f-89d8-a18b7faee3cc@gmx.net> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2016 10:07:00 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Duy Nguyen's message of "Fri, 9 Dec 2016 18:33:08 +0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 48AF1B48-BE3A-11E6-AF9F-B2917B1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Duy Nguyen writes: > On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 3:04 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Stephan Beyer writes: >> >>> [1] By the way: git cherry-pick --quit, git rebase --forget ... >>> different wording for the same thing makes things unintuitive. >> >> It is not too late to STOP "--forget" from getting added to "rebase" >> and give it a better name. > > Having the same operation with different names only increases git > reputation of bad/inconsistent UI. Either forget is renamed to quit, > or vice versa. I prefer forget, but the decision is yours and the > community's. So I'm sending two patches to rename in either direction. > You can pick one. I actually was advocating to remove both by making --abort saner. With an updated --abort that behaves saner, is "rebase --forget" still necessary?