Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> This one, and the in_progress_advice emitted from the patch 1/5, are >> both bad in that they make calls to advise() without guarding it >> with an advice.* configuration variable. > > I'm not sure we have one for cherry-pick/revert/rebase. At the moment > they print advice advice for a failed pick unconditionally... Yes, 1/5 does not introduce a new problem; it just makes it worse by allowing the misdesign survive another update. The one introduced by 4/5 is genuinely new. > ... Maybe that > should be checking advice.resolveConflict though. I think that is a sensible one, rather than inventing a new knob.
