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
