Hi, On Sun, 14 Aug 2022, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Justin Donnelly <justinrdonnelly@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > I hope this is against protocol/etiquette, but after some initial > > feedback from Junio, I haven't gotten any more. I wasn't sure if > > nobody had seen the patch, or if there just wasn't any interest. > > It probably is a bit of both. I personally did not see much point > in adding the long "conflicts" marker to the shell prompt (I did > worry about possible complaints by end users triggered by seeing > them suddenly without asking, which was why I commented on the > patch) and I was waiting for interested folks to speak out. Speaking for myself, I was too busy elsewhere. But now that I looked over the patch, I think it is fine. My only feedback is that it would be wise to only add a single test case because that is plenty enough (after all, it validates the `ls-files --unmerged` call and not the `cherry-pick` code) and it is unnecessary to waste the electricity on additional tests cases (even if somebody else foots the bill, it would do well for all of us to start being more mindful about energy consumption). Ciao, Dscho
