From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 155F71F461 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 23:18:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726111AbfH0XSb (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Aug 2019 19:18:31 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-f65.google.com ([209.85.166.65]:33780 "EHLO mail-io1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726044AbfH0XSa (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Aug 2019 19:18:30 -0400 Received: by mail-io1-f65.google.com with SMTP id z3so2111573iog.0 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 16:18:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=/5o47CicAMyWwKosPdA5GQJV1dh73+TNIrpIrjTGUoU=; b=uqmFF5fgkVVe7XSXO+FXu9xxmrSjkJ5Rys3dCGIaDnG5d1fZpVoCFsLS1KOd/ugxyZ bhodJs1jQby4VbCTAMq9POeucucqidSm5V8puSJGUZwzwk7RPEzNhnXjgDBijq4dlPFm /ehGh+eC5KO1Za9kxOySS3PuOQ8OYPIjgP5/DRWZAtbYAuz4hub43If8uFw87HDKIV4t xBfGjEJOehhIqvHLxNcHu+W5TWTRP2FBzvxKUn6KoPUE0U/ocAymKgVXDQH253RBPELv Z/fsg0/KSShLA+q2JrDfz/67zife/i1Y2Aly6ntP9LHd6T9SBktYqBKJ6Igc6IwxTkP/ 4EGg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=/5o47CicAMyWwKosPdA5GQJV1dh73+TNIrpIrjTGUoU=; b=EwWeXWHKva+hcDGHjplAz5p0I7bIU84YXIxGiwbQnNGqhbAHNaqvpotvTbsBLH+OGj bGFXgmhnf2lZ1RLW20gwLhy8R2dFsbs2WrPAVn3jeAEuIOsmFlctSCaYkqFuWYWuoDJP jbomeL32ZsrY1jqjVSqUxLXo5sr+9dloejJqbaWRuJmHvBRT6Rpl8680JyYfjKMk/oM8 DzifcyZ1PmZnybKxe5Nv/K35LPnEXXT8mo8r4ATervlI8fFWq9rnLJ+5ra5h675v4sNa ajLMyxzGlbkMsiO+CVrF7p2tMuxD6nTsExI+nCmEA1MEFzerHnLS3ayQHz60WTOewR5W Po1Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUTbyL4m73UkJbAlCWgKzC/lFutEahI2bsu3E6leLMhEF88XgvF dZ1zsu2RswsvKWY3mM4pnJA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzwVn0k++tShEXY6+Gx7CBE755wSB4zY4oVJtxk2vf6wTpNf+iY2EaO5YmLv8L8e6Q+r0E4Fg== X-Received: by 2002:a02:cc50:: with SMTP id i16mr1469009jaq.50.1566947909953; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 16:18:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from archbookpro.localdomain (CPE18593399858a-CM185933998587.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com. [174.112.89.95]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v12sm869744ios.16.2019.08.27.16.18.28 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 27 Aug 2019 16:18:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 19:18:27 -0400 From: Denton Liu To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Git Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] status: mention --skip for revert and cherry-pick Message-ID: <20190827231827.GA26899@archbookpro.localdomain> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 02:56:57PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Denton Liu 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? I think that the same argument for or against recommending `--skip` could be made for rebases as well. However, in the rebase case, `--skip` is recommended whenever `--abort` is recommended. With this patch, I made it so that revert and cherry-pick would have `--skip` and `--abort` paired as well. I'm pretty impartial about making this change but I would suggest if we choose not to pursue this then we should also drop the `--skip` recommendation from rebase as well.