From: Jay Soffian <jaysoffian@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 23:05:18 GMT
Subject: Re: git cherry-pick --continue?
Message-ID: <76718491002111505u2935381erc376cea862e15801@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20100211211937.GA12752@coredump.intra.peff.net>

On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>  Automatic cherry-pick failed.  After resolving the conflicts,
>  mark the corrected paths with 'git add <paths>' or 'git rm <paths>'
>  and commit the result with:
>
>          git commit -c HEAD~23
>

Blech, how is this an improvement? Why can't I just say "git
cherry-pick --continue"?

If I've still got the message in my terminal, it's no harder to use
the SHA1. And if I've lost the message in my terminal, HEAD~23 is lost
and I've got to dig the SHA1 out of my shell history anyway.

(This isn't hypothetical; typically I'll cherry-pick, do some crap in
that terminal such that the message is lost, then I've got to go
through my history to see which commit I had been cherry picking. So
changing the message doesn't help with that situation at all.)

j.