Re: [PATCH 1/2] t3507: pin CHERRY_PICK_HEAD absence for a conflicting --no-commit

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Sep 4, 2026, 16:20 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqcxut56pv.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <5a5c7552-8fc8-48be-abf6-063aa31f7711@gmail.com>

Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes:

Show 16 quoted lines

> On 03/09/2026 22:32, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Aleksei Sviridkin <f@lex.la> writes:
>> 
>> I shamelessly asked an AI agent I had nearby to guess what your log
>> message might have meant and got the following.  I am not sure if
>> that matches what you wanted to say, or if it is totally off the
>> mark, but at least I can follow what it is trying to say, even
>> though I do not think if that matches reality (for example, when
>> "--no-commit" is in effect, we probably do not want CHERRY_PICK_HEAD,
>> even though the version of the text given by Gemini below claims it
>> is needed).
>> 
>>      When a cherry-pick is run with the --no-commit option and halts
>>      due to conflicts, Git must still write the CHERRY_PICK_HEAD ref.
>
> No, with --no-commit it must not write CHERRY_PICK_HEAD.

You know that I know that ;-).

My point of asking an AI was to show that it was so unclear to confuse AI into summarizing it down to a complete opposite statement.

> I agree the commit message is confusing and could be much
> shorter.