From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 20:05:06 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] revisions passed to cherry-pick should be in "default" order
Message-ID: <7vtxw6d0ct.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <50289e50.a19f320a.5d99.3fdfSMTPIN_ADDED@gmr-mx.google.com>

y@google.com writes:

> From: Martin von Zweigbergk <martin.von.zweigbergk@gmail.com>
>
> 'git cherry-pick' internally sets the --reverse option while walking
> revisions, so that 'git cherry-pick branch@{u}..branch' will apply the
> revisions starting at the oldest one. If no uninteresing revisions are
> given, --no-walk is implied. Still, the documentation for 'git
> cherry-pick --stdin' uses the following example:
>
>  git rev-list --reverse master -- README | git cherry-pick -n --stdin
>
> The above would seem to reverse the revisions in the output (which it
> does), and then pipe them to 'git cherry-pick', which would reverse
> them again and apply them in the wrong order.

I think we have cleared this confusion up in the previous
discussion.  It it sequencer's bug that reorders the commits when
the caller ("rev-list --reverse" in this case) gives list of
individual commits to replay.

So I think we are all OK with chucking this patch.  Am I mistaken?