From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 08:41:36 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Sequencer Foundations
Message-ID: <20110512084136.GD28872@elie>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=zXWojMOfe9sECUu-X9euCjr4i3w@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

Christian Couder wrote:

> I think that the risk at this point might be to overengineer things
> and to lose time, and then we will perhaps find out that we need to do
> some refactoring of the merge_recursive API anyway.

I agree with the general principle... let's see if I understand the
details of what you are saying.

> If we have cherry-pick with --abort, --continue and --skip that just
> works as well or nearly as well (because it's new) as other stuff it
> will be already a very good thing.

Does "other stuff" mean scripts like "git rebase"?  If I understand
correctly, "git rebase" updates the $dotest directory before each
cherry-pick, unlike this series which only updates $dotest after a
failed cherry-pick.

> And with enough tests we will
> hopefully be able to build and refactor safely after that. Maybe we
> will eventually find out that what you suggest is in fact needed even
> for cherry-pick with --abort, --continue and --skip, but for now I
> would prefer trying to make it work with as few changes and work as
> possible.

I suspect that refactoring everything to use error() in place of die()
requires more risky changes and work than updating .git/sequencer/
between cherry-picks.  Of course I can easily be wrong.

Hoping that is clearer,
Jonathan