Junio C Hamano schrieb: > As we established in the previous round, this is _different_ from --merge, > but *not* in the sense that --merge is more dangerous and users should be > using this new option instead, but in the sense that --merge perfectly > works well for its intended use case, and this new option triggers a mode > of operation that is meant to be used in a completely different use case, > which is unspecified in this series without documentation. > > In that light, is --merge-safe still a good name for the option, or merely > a misleading one? Do I understand this correctly? (1) The intended use-case of --merge is to "reset _a_ merge". (2) The intended use-case of --merge-safe is to point the branch head to a different commit, but to carry the changes that currently are in the index and wd over to the new commit, similar to checkout --merge. I had mistaken that --merge actually performs (2) because of the striking similarity of the option's name to checkout's --merge. So, IMHO, whatever the new option is named that performs (2) - it introduces an inconsistency, because --merge is already taken. -- Hannes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html