Hi, Jonathan Nieder writes: > Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: >> Jonathan Nieder writes: >>> In that case, I'd be mildly tempted to call it something crazy like >>> start_or_continue_replay() > [...] >> Why? Is introducing new terminology so bad? Should I explain what I >> mean by "continuation" in the commit message/ a comment? > > If "process_continuation" means "parse .git/sequencer state, which we > are pretending is a serialized continuation object, and either (a) > call it, (b) throw it away, or (c) modify it and then call it", then > yes, how do you expect anyone to know what you are talking about? > > Less importantly, starting a cherry-pick (which is what pick_commits() > already does) doesn't seem to fit in that picture. > > A simpler jargon-filled description of this model is checkpoint/ > restart. But it is an incomplete analogy and still not a great name. > With a goal of making future writers' lives happier and more > productive in mind, I do not think it is often worth confusing them by > choosing a clever presentation of ideas instead of a clear one. Thanks for the elaborate explanation; I can see what's wrong with it now. However, I "start_or_continue_or_stop_or_[insert more options here]_replay" isn't a good name. I want something future-proof, because I intend to extend this with more nifty helpers like "skip one". Your earlier "pick_revisions" suggestion doesn't sound like a bad alternative now -- let me know if you have any other suggestions. Thanks. -- Ram -- 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