Re: [PATCH 09/22] sequencer: completely revamp the "todo" script parsing

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Sep 1, 2016, 06:35 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1609010830110.129229@virtualbox>
In-Reply-To: <CAGZ79kYP6jYyuEOwQPC6pcOxCMVNNQ24pVLoQVrv6nNrGsDTKA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Kuba and Stefan,

On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, Stefan Beller wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Jakub Narębski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> > BTW. perhaps we would be able to continue with 'git continue', regardless
> > of what we have started with, I wonder...
> >
> 
> git continue as a shorthand for `git <relevant-cmd> --continue` sounds great.

Before we get ahead of ourselves:

1) this has nothing to do with the patch series at hand, and

2) if we were to introduce `git continue`, we would need to think long and
   hard about the following issues:

	I) are there potentially ambiguous <relevant-cmd>s that the user
	   may want to continue?

	II) what about options? You can say `git rebase --continue
	    --no-ff`, for example, but not `git cherry-pick --continue
	    --no-ff`...

	III) Would it not be confusing to have a subcommand `continue`
	     that does *not* serve a *single* purpose? It's kinda flying
	     into the face of the Unix philosophy.

Ciao, Dscho