From: Jay Soffian <jaysoffian@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 22:13:30 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/2] CHERRY_HEAD
Message-ID: <AANLkTin-9g9Ux=_oKBMuB+Yp-bOtBCTjqMWU7ENctXdM@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vk4h1lzjj.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> I've read this over, haven't run it, but I really like the idea. It
>> sucks that you have to save away the commit sha1 somwhere after a
>> failed cherry-pick to use it again. It should just behave like `git
>> rebase --continue`, which this implements.
>
> I don't understand.  What do you think rebase does to be able to continue?
> Doesn't it have to save the commit object name away somewhere?

I took it to mean that the behavior after a conflict should be 'add'
followed by 'cherry-pick --continue', not 'add' followed by 'commit'.
Not that I disagree, but that's a lot more work, see my reply to Ævar
just before this.

j.