Re: Any interest in 'git merge --continue' as a command

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Dec 10, 2016, 18:16 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqoa0jps4d.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20161210085938.rfbkuwpvyhnhuzhn@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

Show 7 quoted lines

> No, I think your reasoning makes sense. But I also think we've already
> choosen to have "--continue" mean "conclude the current, and continue if
> there is anything left" in other contexts (e.g., a single-item
> cherry-pick). It's more vague, but I think it keeps the user's mental
> model simpler if we provide a standard set of options for multi-step
> commands (e.g., always "--continue/--abort/--skip", though there are
> some like merge that omit "--skip" if it does not make sense).

Yup. I know you know me well enough to know that I didn't mean to say "oh this one needs to be called differently" ;-) I just felt that "--continue" in that context did not sit well.