Re: [PATCH 2/4] revisions passed to cherry-pick should be in "default" order

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Aug 13, 2012, 20:52 UTC
Message-ID: <7vlihicy57.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAOeW2eENsnrPqBL795FcwMgHURS6YsPBW6FYvb=DwD-UtgPZ5g@mail.gmail.com>

Martin von Zweigbergk <martin.von.zweigbergk@gmail.com> writes:

> By the way, I can see the usefulness of --reverse when giving a range,
> but I think it's a little confusing when not giving a range.

"git rev-list --reverse --root v1.0.0" is a way to say "give me a list of commits to be replayed in sequence" without having a bottom, no?

Ah, you mean when we do _not_ walk.

Yeah, that is why I said that when we do not walk, we should not even call into prepare_revision_walk() in the first place in my earlier message. We should take the commits as given from the revs->pending.objects list instead.

With your "no_walk = NO_WALK_UNSORTED", calling prepare_revision_walk() would amont to the same thing, as you would not sort the commits and use them as given by the user.

> So "git cherry-pick A B" will apply B first, then A.

I am confused a bit. Are you describing a buggy behaviour in the current codebase, or are you saying we should fix it to behave that way?