From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 18:22:06 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] revision: add "--ignore-merges" option to counteract "-m"
Message-ID: <20200729182206.GA2339835@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqv9i7cq1k.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com>

On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 02:01:27PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> >  -m::
> > +--no-ignore-merges::
> 
> This invites a natural "does --ignore-merges exist, and if so what
> does it do?"  Why not to have "--[no-]ignore-merges" as a separate
> entry immediately after the existing "-m" instead?

I was hoping it would all be implied and I could dodge those questions.
But it seems not. :)

After thinking on it more, I flipped it to:

  -m::
  --diff-merges::
     [existing text...]

and then I don't think we need to have another block for
--no-diff-merges.

I'll likewise add a statement that "-m" is implied by "--first-parent"
and can be counteracted with the "--no" form, which I think should spell
out all the implications of the series.

-Peff