Re: [bitbake-devel] [docs] [PATCH 1/2] bitbake-setup: rename "abort" rebase conflict stragegy to "halt"

["Antonin Godard" <antonin.godard@bootlin.com>]

On Tue Mar 31, 2026 at 1:36 PM CEST, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> There’s a simpler rationale too: this follows ‘git rebase —abort’. If git
> upstream finds a better word, we will follow. And I agree that all of the
> proposed alternatives are less accurate.

This goes against previous efforts to convert the documentation and other
components to not use these words :/
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/topic/inclusive_language_summary/75821819

[...]
>> > This is not what halt means. Maybe 'reset' would be a better choice? Or
>> > if you really want to follow the recommendations from that website, I
>> > guess "cancel"?
>>
>> The trouble is none of these alternatives really match what abort
>> means, reset and cancel do mean something different. "abandon" might be
>> closer but still isn't right. "attempt" maybe? If we get too creative
>> with this, users just won't understand what it means :(

I had the impression, from the documentation, that bitbake-setup would leave the
repository in the middle of a rebase, to let you deal with conflict, and then
continue on the next bitbake-setup update call.

It appears to use --abort instead, so a misunderstanding from my part.

Out of these options, I think "reset" might be the best one, I agree with
Quentin. But I'm not a native speaker, so I might not have an understanding as
subtle as others.

I'll let Richard decide on what to do here.

Antonin