Re: Any interest in 'git merge --continue' as a command

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 08:57:58PM +1300, Chris Packham wrote:

> I hit this at $dayjob recently.
> 
> A developer had got themselves into a confused state when needing to
> resolve a merge conflict.
> 
> They knew about git rebase --continue (and git am and git cherry-pick)
> but they were unsure how to "continue" a merge (it didn't help that
> the advice saying to use 'git commit' was scrolling off the top of the
> terminal). I know that using 'git commit' has been the standard way to
> complete a merge but given other commands have a --continue should
> merge have it as well?

It seems like that would be in line with 35d2fffdb (Provide 'git merge
--abort' as a synonym to 'git reset --merge', 2010-11-09), whose stated
goal was providing consistency with other multi-command operations.

I assume it would _just_ run a vanilla "git commit", and not try to do
any trickery with updating the index (which could be disastrous).

-Peff



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]