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

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

 



On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 09:49:13PM +1300, Chris Packham wrote:

> > There is nothing to "continue" in a stopped merge where Git asked
> > for help from the user, and because of that, I view the final "git
> > commit" as "concluding the merge", not "continuing".  "continue"
> > makes quite a lot of sense with rebase and cherry-pick A..B that
> > stopped; it concludes the current step and let it continue to
> > process the remainder.  So from that point of view, it somewhat
> > feels strange to call it "merge --continue", but it probably is just
> > me.
> 
> Yeah I did think that --continue wasn't quite the right word. git
> merge --conclude would probably be the most accurate.

I'd be against giving it a subtly-different name. It's just going to
frustrate people who cannot remember when to use "--conclude" and when
it is "--continue". The strength of the proposal, IMHO, is that it
abstracts the idea of "go on to the next thing or finish" across many
commands.

-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]