Hi Johannes, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > Hi Sergey, > > On Fri, 30 Mar 2018, Sergey Organov wrote: > >> Could we please agree to stop using backward compatibility as an >> objection in the discussion of the --recreate-merges feature? > > No. > > The expectation of users as to what a `pick` is has not changed just > because you wish it would. As if I ever suggested to change user expectations. Could you please stop putting words into my mouth? I _am_ a user, and I expect 'pick' to pick commits, no matter how many parents they might have. And no, --preserve-merges did not ever pick commits with number of parents more than one, it rather threw them away and re-merged the heads. Calling it 'pick' was a huge mistake indeed! Fixing that mistake is what I expect, as a user. Just teach the 'pick' to correctly pick any commit, please! > > That is a matter of backwards-compatibility. OK, fine, at least its only about user expectations and not about some scripting incompatibility. > You see, if you are driving a car for a hundred years already, and then > switch to a different car, and it has a lever in the same place as your > previous car's windshield wiper, but in the new car it has a button that > activates the emergency driver seat ejection OMG *it has a seat ejection > like in the James Bond movies! Where can I get that car?* Sorry for > disgressing. Except it's irrelevant as the 'pick' will still pick commits. > I am really concerned about that willingness to put an innocuous button, > so to speak, onto something users got really used to, over the course of a > decade or so, when that button should really be made red and blinking and > OMG where can I get that car? It's irrelevant as the 'pick' will still pick commits. > So to reiterate, I am really interested in a practical solution that won't > cause nasty surprises. I rather don't see how it possibly could cause any surprises, especially compared to using 'merge' to pick commits. > Meaning: `pick` != merge. Exactly! Use 'merge' when you merge, as you are already doing. Use 'pick' when you are picking. You don't merge "merge commit" when you are picking it! > That was a mistake in preserve-merges, as I have only mentioned like a > hundred times, and we won't repeat it. The mistake was that it used 'pick' to denote re-merge. You already fixed that mistake by introducing 'merge' to re-merge, thanks God. Please don't commit yet another mistake by now using 'merge' to pick! -- Sergey
