Re: [PATCH] rebase: learn --discard subcommand

[Martin von Zweigbergk <martin.von.zweigbergk@gmail.com>]

On Sat, 28 May 2011, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:

> > I used "rm -r" without -f to match how it is done in --abort, but
> > maybe -f should be used? That is what we recommend to the end-user to
> > use today.
> 
> If you've verified that a rebase is already in progress, I don't see
> the point of using '-f'. Otherwise, it should error out and say that
> "no rebase is in progress", like the other command-line options
> currently do.

Yep, it does verify that a rebase is in progress. I think rm without
-f still asks the user to confirm if the file is read-only. I can't
see why that would happen, so maybe it's good to have the user confirm
it it does happen.

> > A difference from --abort is that --discard does not clear
> > rerere. Need this be mentioned in the documentation?
> 
> It depends on what you're expecting the user to do in this detached
> HEAD state, no?

The subcommand will most likely be run when the user had forgotten the
current rebase and tries to start a new rebase and get's the message
that a rebase is already in progress. At this point, the user is not
necessarily in a detached HEAD state any more.

/Martin