Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > I think even without the test-terminal cleanup, this is a good thing. > Any time there is a heuristic like isatty(), we should have a way for > the user to be more explicit about what they want(). I very often do "git am --no-3" to countermand a failed "git am -3" (or vice versa), so I'll be hit very hard with a need to retrain my fingers. But I'll live ;-) "--retry" is a horrible word, in that it makes it sound like it will keep trying to apply the same patch over and over until it applies cleanly or something. Can't we use "--continue" like everybody else (like "git rebase --continue", etc.), or would that be even more confusing?
