Re: [RFC/PATCH 1/2] Introduce CHERRY_HEAD

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Feb 15, 2011, 22:59 UTC
Message-ID: <7v4o84nbuh.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <20110215221832.GA826@elie>

Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> writes:

> I wonder if cherry-pick shouldn't also write MERGE_MSG or similar so
> that gets taken care of automatically?  That would also allow options
> like -x and -m to work better.

Hm, that probably is a good idea.

Show 22 quoted lines

> diff --git a/Documentation/git-cherry-pick.txt b/Documentation/git-cherry-pick.txt
> index 749d68a..e8db99b 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-cherry-pick.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-cherry-pick.txt
> @@ -16,6 +16,25 @@ Given one or more existing commits, apply the change each one
>  introduces, recording a new commit for each.  This requires your
>  working tree to be clean (no modifications from the HEAD commit).
>  
> +When it is not obvious how to apply a change, the following
> +happens:
> +
> +1. The current branch and `HEAD` pointer stay at the last commit
> +   successfully made.
> +2. The `CHERRY_HEAD` ref is set to point at the commit that
> +   introduced the change that is difficult to apply.
> +3. Paths in which the change applied cleanly are updated both
> +   in the index file and in your working tree.
> +4. For conflicting paths, the index file records up to three
> +   versions, as described in the "TRUE MERGE" section of
> +   linkgit:git-merge[1].  The working tree files will include
> +   a description of the conflict bracketed by the usual
> +   conflict markers `<<<<<<<` and `>>>>>>>`.

What happened to the `=======`? I thought you were copying and pasting from the said section.