On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 08:57:58PM +1300, Chris Packham wrote: > I hit this at $dayjob recently. > > A developer had got themselves into a confused state when needing to > resolve a merge conflict. > > They knew about git rebase --continue (and git am and git cherry-pick) > but they were unsure how to "continue" a merge (it didn't help that > the advice saying to use 'git commit' was scrolling off the top of the > terminal). I know that using 'git commit' has been the standard way to > complete a merge but given other commands have a --continue should > merge have it as well?
It seems like that would be in line with 35d2fffdb (Provide 'git merge --abort' as a synonym to 'git reset --merge', 2010-11-09), whose stated goal was providing consistency with other multi-command operations. I assume it would _just_ run a vanilla "git commit", and not try to do any trickery with updating the index (which could be disastrous). -Peff
