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

> 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.
>
>> 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.