On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 10:59:57AM +0000, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 8 Nov 2007, Jeff King wrote: > > > So I am fine with the original patch (unconditional reset --hard), but > > it would be nice to see the people who care submit concrete proposals > > for such a safety valve. > > Isn't having to say "--skip" instead of "--continue" enough? Some people > might complain that it's too easy to get your fingers wired to type > --skip. > > In that case, I might beg to differ for two reasons: --skip is definitely > not the default operation, so the fingers do not get any chance to do > that, and even if, they would get wired to --force --skip just as easily. > > Besides, after my patch to rebase on a detached HEAD, it is very easy to > go back to the original state and try again. We can't make --skip do an automatic reset --hard. I expect --skip to tell me if I haven't finished resolving conflicts. If it doesn't do that, I'll lose work. I can't be the only user with that expectation. (To be more specific: the work I lose is the work spent resolving how however many conflicts I've dealt with so far. It isn't always the case that I get to a certain point in a rebase and say "ah, yes, I know this is already applied, I can reset and skip it." More often I want to go through each conflict and decide individually. So I do that for a few, I run --continue or --skip when I think I'm done (but don't actually check first, 'cause I count on rebase to do that), then fix up anything remaining.) --b. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
