Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] de-confuse git cherry-pick --author

> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 10:15:05PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> 
> > > Should this not rather be
> > > 
> > > -		if (!cmit || get_revision(opts->revs))
> > > -			return error("BUG: expected exactly one commit from walk");
> > > +		if (!cmit)
> > > +			return error(_("empty commit set passed"));
> > > +		if (get_revision(opts->revs))
> > > +			return error(_("unexpected extra commit from walk"));
> > 
> > Yeah, you're right. I'm not sure how a single rev with no-walk would
> > ever turn up more than one commit, though. So I think we should probably
> > go with:
> > 
> >   if (!cmit)
> > 	return error(_("empty commit set passed"));
> >   if (get_revision(opts->revs))
> > 	BUG("unexpected extra commit from walk");
> > 
> > And then if we ever see that case, we can decide from there what the
> > right action is (though _probably_ it's just to emit an error like you
> > have above, it might be a sign that our single-pick logic is wrong).
> > 
> > I'll re-roll in that direction, and discuss further in the commit
> > message.
> 
> After poking at it a bit more, I've convinced myself that this is the
> right thing, as options like "--branches" which expand into multiple
> tips already push us into the other code path.
> 
> So here's a re-roll. The first one is identical except for the typo-fix
> in the commit message.
> 
>   [1/2]: sequencer: handle empty-set cases consistently
>   [2/2]: sequencer: don't say BUG on bogus input
> 
>  sequencer.c                     | 12 ++++++++----
>  t/t3510-cherry-pick-sequence.sh |  7 ++++++-
>  2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)