git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: [RFC PATCH v2] revert: Implement --abort processing

From
Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Date
Jun 12, 2011, 12:09 UTC
Message-ID
<BANLkTi=T0wCg1bKzmtQEQ-J-5ogqRZaqRg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To
<20110611112213.GA25268@elie>
Hi Jonathan,
Jonathan Nieder writes:
Show 5 quoted lines
> The documentation could say:
>
>        To wipe out everything and get back to where you started, use:
>
>                git reset --hard PRE_CHERRY_PICK_HEAD

My notion of --abort has changed: I simply want to remove the state files for the cherry-pick so that the user can execute more cherry-pick/ revert commands. I didn't think a soft reset would be intrusive. Hm, you're suggesting using a ref -- I was wondering what to do with CHERY_PICK_HEAD. I'm not entirely convinced, but I'll wait for the others to comment and think about this for some time.

Show 19 quoted lines
> What if instead of --abort something else were simpler to think about?
> As a random example, I can imagine a "git sequencer --edit" command
> that would present the sequence in an editor and let me revise the
> plan --- would that do the trick?
>
>        1
>        2
>        3
>        4
>        * YOU ARE HERE
>        5
>        6
>        7
>        8
>
>  - Remove lines 5-8: removes sequencer state, leaves HEAD as is
>  - Remove everything: rewinds to abort sequence
>  - Add a line 2.5 between 2 and 3: rewind to 2, cherry-pick 2.5,
>   continue.
Interesting perspective.  I essentially have to keep two TODO files
and run a diff until I find the first different line.  Then, I have to
reset to that SHA-1 and replay the rest of the user-edited TODO.  Can
be complicated to get right, but it seems like quite an elegant
interactive solution.  It takes care of all three: --abort and --skip.
 We'd still need a --continue to non-interactively continue after a
conflict resolution though, no?
Show 5 quoted lines
> Which is to say: if you have a story about what --abort will be used
> for, the life of others evaluating the thing becomes better and the
> upsides and downsides can be seen in perspective.  A story like "am
> and rebase have --abort, so cherry-pick should have one, too" is
> harder to think about.

I agree. There's little point in being stuck with historical conventions -- we should try something new and see how it works out :)

Thanks.
-- Ram
Previous: Jonathan NiederNext: Jonathan Nieder
Message 3 of 8 in “revert: Implement --abort processing”
  1. revert: Implement --abort processingRamkumar Ramachandra, Jun 11, 2011
  2. Jonathan NiederJun 11, 2011
  3. Ramkumar RamachandraJun 12, 2011
  4. Jonathan NiederJun 12, 2011
  5. Ramkumar RamachandraJun 12, 2011
  6. Jonathan NiederJun 12, 2011
  7. Ramkumar RamachandraJun 13, 2011
  8. Jonathan NiederJun 13, 2011

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.