Re: [PATCH] status: suggest `git merge --continue`, not `git commit`

["Julia Evans" <julia@jvns.ca>]

On Tue, Oct 6, 2026, at 2:20 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> "Julia Evans via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
>
> [Administrivia]
>
> As you have
>
>     cc: D. Ben Knoble" ben.knoble@gmail.com
>
> at the end of your pull request that you gave to GitGitGadget, you
> ended up with a bogus Cc: address that reads
>
>     "D. Ben Knoble <ben.knoble"@gmail.com>
>
> you may want to help improving GGG by raising an issue to reject (or
> ignore) such a malformed address.

done: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/gitgitgadget/issues/2385

> [end of administrivia]
>
>> diff --git a/t/t7060-wtstatus.sh b/t/t7060-wtstatus.sh
>> index 942ddbbf0e..a9b435b5e3 100755
>> --- a/t/t7060-wtstatus.sh
>> +++ b/t/t7060-wtstatus.sh
>> @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ test_expect_success 'M/D conflict does not segfault' '
>>  	cat >expect <<EOF &&
>>  On branch side
>>  You have unmerged paths.
>> -  (fix conflicts and run "git commit")
>> +  (fix conflicts and run "git merge --continue")
>>    (use "git merge --abort" to abort the merge)
>
> This message comes from show_merge_in_progress(), which is called
> only when the code is convinced that it is seeing an unmerged
> index due to a conflicted git merge.  We can therefore make this
> message as merge-specific as we want.  The suggestion to use
> 'git merge --abort' already does this.
>
>> diff --git a/wt-status.c b/wt-status.c
>> index 57772c7501..f7b0dc29d5 100644
>> --- a/wt-status.c
>> +++ b/wt-status.c
>> @@ -1273,7 +1273,7 @@ static void show_merge_in_progress(struct wt_status *s,
>>  		status_printf_ln(s, color, _("You have unmerged paths."));
>>  		if (s->hints) {
>>  			status_printf_ln(s, color,
>> -					 _("  (fix conflicts and run \"git commit\")"));
>> +					 _("  (fix conflicts and run \"git merge --continue\")"));
>>  			status_printf_ln(s, color,
>>  					 _("  (use \"git merge --abort\" to abort the merge)"));
>>  		}
>> @@ -1282,7 +1282,7 @@ static void show_merge_in_progress(struct wt_status *s,
>>  			_("All conflicts fixed but you are still merging."));
>>  		if (s->hints)
>>  			status_printf_ln(s, color,
>> -				_("  (use \"git commit\" to conclude merge)"));
>> +				_("  (use \"git merge --continue\" to conclude merge)"));
>>  	}
>>  	wt_longstatus_print_trailer(s);
>>  }
>
> We could tighten "You have unmerged paths." even further to indicate
> that these paths came from a conflicted 'git merge'.  In the same
> file, show_cherry_pick_in_progress() and show_revert_in_progress()
> already provide instructions very specific to these commands.  Since
> the message for 'git merge' is the oldest, it is not surprising that
> we did not update it when 'git merge --continue', the instructions
> for cherry-pick and revert, or 'git merge --abort' instruction were
> added to the system.  This commit moves us belatedly in the right
> direction, and as always, it is better late than never.

Yeah I agree that "You have unmerged paths." could likely be made
clearer. Appreciate the note about how the implementation works.

> The changes look good.  Thanks.