On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Ãvar ArnfjÃrà Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> I've read this over, haven't run it, but I really like the idea. It >> sucks that you have to save away the commit sha1 somwhere after a >> failed cherry-pick to use it again. It should just behave like `git >> rebase --continue`, which this implements. > > I don't understand. ÂWhat do you think rebase does to be able to continue? > Doesn't it have to save the commit object name away somewhere? I took it to mean that the behavior after a conflict should be 'add' followed by 'cherry-pick --continue', not 'add' followed by 'commit'. Not that I disagree, but that's a lot more work, see my reply to Ãvar just before this. j. -- 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