Am 24.01.24 um 20:46 schrieb Junio C Hamano: > Johannes Sixt <j6t@xxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Good point! IMO, REBASE_HEAD should have lower precedence than all the >> other *_HEADs. It would mean to reorder the entries: >> >> static const char *const other_head[] = { >> "MERGE_HEAD", "CHERRY_PICK_HEAD", "REVERT_HEAD", "REBASE_HEAD" >> }; >> >> (and perhaps adjust the error message, too). > > And probably give a warning saying that we noticed you are rebasing > and cherry-picking and we chose to show the --merge based on the > relationship between cherry-pick-head and head, ignoring your rebase > status, or something. I don't think that's necessary. When rebase stopped with a merge conflict, neither of the other commands can begin their work until the conflicted state is removed. That should be a concious act, just like when thereafter one of these other commands is used and leads to a conflict. At least I would certainly not need a reminder. -- Hannes