From: Phil Hord <phil.hord@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 15:46:18 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] New sequencer workflow!
Message-ID: <CABURp0qt+r09Uy_nfLd60pXiMMXgTOUB__XL-N=S7HaJa-oWoA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1321181181-23923-1-git-send-email-artagnon@gmail.com>

On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 5:46 AM, Ramkumar Ramachandra
<artagnon@gmail.com> wrote:
>  $ git revert moo..baz
>  ... conflict ...
>  $ echo "resolved" >problematicfile
>  $ git add problematicfile
>  $ git sequencer --continue
>
> In other words, it just doesn't matter how you started what sequencing
> operation: you can always continue a it with "git sequencer
> --continue" and reset it with "git sequencer --reset".


I see that --reset was added to cherry-pick, revert and sequencer
around the same time back in August.  Shouldn't it be spelled
"--abort" instead?

This would align better with other commands that do the same thing
(am, merge, notes-merge, rebase) since they all appear to spell it
"--abort".  Also, it will make it easier in git 2.x when we begin
using "git continue" and "git abort" rather than "git reset".

Phil