From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2018 20:21:04 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sequencer: handle empty-set cases consistently
Message-ID: <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.1807092220460.75@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>
In-Reply-To: <20180709194819.GA7980@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Hi Peff,

On Mon, 9 Jul 2018, Jeff King wrote:

> If the user gives us a set that prepare_revision_walk()
> takes to be empty, like:
> 
>   git cherry-pick base..base
> 
> then we report an error. It's nonsense, and there's nothing
> to pick.
> 
> But if they use revision options that later cull the list,
> like:
> 
>   git cherry-pick --author=nobody base~2..base
> 
> then we quietly create an empty todo list and return
> success.
> 
> Arguably either behavior is acceptable, but we should
> definitely be consistent about it. Reporting an error
> seems to match the original intent, which dates all the way
> back to 7e2bfd3f99 (revert: allow cherry-picking more than
> one commit, 2010-06-02). That in turn was trying to match
> the single-commit case that exited before then (and which
> continues to issue an error).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>

Makes sense to me.

Thanks,
Dscho