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 437F41FF7F for ; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 18:16:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751966AbcLJSQG (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Dec 2016 13:16:06 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:57992 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751892AbcLJSQF (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Dec 2016 13:16:05 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7375B53E2A; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 13:16:04 -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=iTO0XyB+guPWvbFeRmGpC/x/hOw=; b=U1HjCf qxk/+DfnCRa/yo46gHM8hW9ctawnnNJydVlJqppcjacFoqUBPx16HALqae1PKii2 MYlhtr1TSrpG0rszWH8WXGhP7FSNFkrowuSLyRhVuj2Ab2Ih9gsS5RRMb48uB71C G9jNKlT9aVTrNqyiV3j4/VQaGYJy0Np21DXXk= 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=v786IQ0QsmmQDy7siSEjaGuYHRsgzKon jqpR07tb3/bF3hbbPtOBOvFuy37UWEcl49Qlzlb2uZUnlmUIlO4C0hYyoPqMtaDz LduDXUKj35LmwjwYhbuiASf3HcVpY00hqcNKaISMaBADv0QsbHveRLbCgXo0tqNt v/O0+xTxm4I= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B6D453E28; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 13:16:04 -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-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D8D3253E27; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 13:16:03 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Chris Packham , GIT Subject: Re: Any interest in 'git merge --continue' as a command References: <20161209091127.sxxczhfslrqsqs3m@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20161210085938.rfbkuwpvyhnhuzhn@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 10:16:02 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20161210085938.rfbkuwpvyhnhuzhn@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Sat, 10 Dec 2016 03:59:39 -0500") 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: B634993E-BF04-11E6-AC09-E98412518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > No, I think your reasoning makes sense. But I also think we've already > choosen to have "--continue" mean "conclude the current, and continue if > there is anything left" in other contexts (e.g., a single-item > cherry-pick). It's more vague, but I think it keeps the user's mental > model simpler if we provide a standard set of options for multi-step > commands (e.g., always "--continue/--abort/--skip", though there are > some like merge that omit "--skip" if it does not make sense). Yup. I know you know me well enough to know that I didn't mean to say "oh this one needs to be called differently" ;-) I just felt that "--continue" in that context did not sit well.