Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] status: mention --skip for revert and cherry-pick
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Aug 27, 2019, 21:56 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqef162rx2.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <be64ce1e92c60f9587b137d36e98532604d4a1ff.1566880835.git.liu.denton@gmail.com>
Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com> writes:
> When reverting or cherry-picking, one of the options we can pass the > sequencer is `--skip`. However, unlike rebasing, `--skip` is not > mentioned as a possible option in the status message. Mention it so that > users are more aware of their options.
Is this a good thing, though?
Giving up (because you do not have enough time or concentration to finish the cherry-pick or revert in progress) with --abort, and committing to the resolution after spending effort to deal with a conflicted cherry-pick or revert with --continue, are both sensible actions after seeing the command stop due to conflicts. Is "--skip" a recommendable action in the same way? Doesn't a multi-commit series often break if you drop just one in the middle, especially if the series is sensibly structured as a logical progression?