Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> You mean that cherry_pick with GIT_CHERRY_PICK_HELP suppresses >> CHERRY_PICK_HEAD is not even a bug? I think that it is what the existing test is telling us. Of course, with a good reason, an earlier design can be updated as long as we make sure we won't hurt existing users who may rely on the current design, but ... > Looking at the history I think it is fair to conclude that > GIT_CHERRY_PICK_HELP was introduced as a way to help people writing > scripts built on top of 'git cherry-pick' like 'git rebase' that want > to have a custom message and do not want to leave CHERRY_PICK_HEAD > around if there are conflicts. I don't think it was intended as a way > for users to change the help when cherry-picking and has never been > documented as such. I think we'd be better to focus on improving the > default help that cherry-pick prints as the second patch in this > series does. ... I think that is a reasonable stance to take [*1*]. If the default help message can be improved, that is a good thing to do regardless. Thanks. [Footnote] *1* Tying the "here is a custom HELP text" environment variable to "having a customization means whoever is driving the cherry-pick machinery is ALSO responsible for sequencing and we will remove CHERRY_PICK_HEAD" is a rather unfortunate design, but as long as that is documented, it is a workable design.
