From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
To: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Cc: Git List <git@vger.kernel.org>,
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>, Jeff King <peff@peff.net>,
Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>,
Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2] revert: Implement --abort processing
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 07:21:45 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110612122145.GA20495@elie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=T0wCg1bKzmtQEQ-J-5ogqRZaqRg@mail.gmail.com>
Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
> My notion of --abort has changed: I simply want to remove the state
> files for the cherry-pick so that the user can execute more
> cherry-pick/ revert commands. I didn't think a soft reset would be
> intrusive.
Well, if you understand this part then you can forget most of the
rest of what I said. Think about this for a second. New user (or
forgetful, experienced user), has just run
git cherry-pick HEAD..topic
to integrate the changes from topic in a linear history. Ran into
conflicts, wanted to give up. Ran
git cherry-pick --abort
Would this person expect:
- that "git diff --cached" would return a pile of changes
- that "git reset --keep", "git reset --merge", "git checkout",
"git merge", and various other commands would refuse to do much,
for fear of clobbering the new "local changes"
- that the worktree would be unchanged
- etc
Would they be happy about it? Just put yourself in their shoes. A
soft reset is near the most intrusive behavior possible.
And that is a good way to think about the UI for any new facility. If
you disregard about how flexible it is in abstract, how easy to
implement, how elegant-sounding and just think about a person using it
will find her quality of life improved or worsened, that is (1) a good
sanity-check on a design and (2) basically the only way to explain it
to other people.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-12 12:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-11 6:36 [RFC PATCH v2] revert: Implement --abort processing Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-11 11:22 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-06-12 12:09 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-12 12:21 ` Jonathan Nieder [this message]
2011-06-12 12:51 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-12 22:12 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-06-13 14:55 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2011-06-13 20:28 ` Jonathan Nieder
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110612122145.GA20495@elie \
--to=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=artagnon@gmail.com \
--cc=barkalow@iabervon.org \
--cc=chriscool@tuxfamily.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).