Hi Kuba, On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, Jakub Narębski wrote: > W dniu 31.08.2016 o 20:36, Johannes Schindelin pisze: > > I wonder: would 'git cherry-pick --continue' be able to finish > 'git revert', and vice versa, then? Or 'git sequencer --continue'? I just tested this, via diff --git a/t/t3510-cherry-pick-sequence.sh b/t/t3510-cherry-pick-sequence.sh index 96c7640..085d8bc 100755 --- a/t/t3510-cherry-pick-sequence.sh +++ b/t/t3510-cherry-pick-sequence.sh @@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ test_expect_success 'cherry-pick mid-cherry-pick-sequence' ' git checkout HEAD foo && git cherry-pick base && git cherry-pick picked && - git cherry-pick --continue && + git revert --continue && git diff --exit-code anotherpick (Danger! Whitespace corrupted!!!) It appears that this passes now. Probably `git sequencer --continue` would work, too, if there was a `git sequencer`. :0) > > On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, Jakub Narębski wrote: > >> W dniu 29.08.2016 o 10:04, Johannes Schindelin pisze: > > >>> diff --git a/t/t3510-cherry-pick-sequence.sh b/t/t3510-cherry-pick-sequence.sh > >>> index 7b7a89d..6465edf 100755 > >>> --- a/t/t3510-cherry-pick-sequence.sh > >>> +++ b/t/t3510-cherry-pick-sequence.sh > >>> @@ -459,17 +459,6 @@ test_expect_success 'malformed instruction sheet 1' ' > >>> test_expect_code 128 git cherry-pick --continue > >>> ' > >>> > >>> -test_expect_success 'malformed instruction sheet 2' ' > >> > >> Hmmm... the description is somewhat lacking (especially compared to > >> the rest of test), anyway. > >> > >> BTW. we should probably rename 'malformed instruction sheet 2' > >> to 'malformed instruction sheet' if there are no further such > >> tests after this removal, isn't it? > > > > No, we cannot rename it after this patch because the patch removes it ;-) > > (It is not a file name but really a label for a test case.) > > Ooops. What I wanted to say that after removing the test case named > 'malformed instruction sheet 2' we should also rename *earlier* test > case from 'malformed instruction sheet 1' to 'malformed instruction sheet', > as it is now the only 'malformed instruction sheet *' test case. Actually, you know, I completely missed the fact that there was a "malformed instruction sheet 3". I renumbered it. Thanks, Dscho