Re: [RFC/PATCH] merge: Add '--continue' option as a synonym for 'git commit'
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:02 PM, Markus Hitter wrote:
> Am 12.12.2016 um 09:34 schrieb Chris Packham:
>> Teach 'git merge' the --continue option which allows 'continuing' a
>> merge by completing it. The traditional way of completing a merge after
>> resolving conflicts is to use 'git commit'. Now with commands like 'git
>> rebase' and 'git cherry-pick' having a '--continue' option adding such
>> an option to 'git merge' presents a consistent UI.
>
> Like.
>
> While Junio is entirely right that this is redundant, the inner workings of
> Git are just voodoo for a (guessed) 95% of users out there, so a consistent
> UI is important.
>
>> DESCRIPTION
>> ---
>> @@ -61,6 +62,9 @@ reconstruct the original (pre-merge) changes. Therefore:
>> discouraged: while possible, it may leave you in a state that is hard to
>> back out of in the case of a conflict.
>>
>> +The fourth syntax ("`git merge --continue`") can only be run after the
>> +merge has resulted in conflicts. 'git merge --continue' will take the
>> +currently staged changes and complete the merge.
>
> I think this should mention the equivalence to 'git commit'.
>
It is mentioned in the OPTIONS section where the --continue option is
documented. I could move it here but the OPTIONS section is where the
--abort synonym also has a reference to git reset --merge.
>
> Markus
>
> --
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Dipl. Ing. (FH) Markus Hitter
> http://www.jump-ing.de/
Re: [RFC/PATCH] merge: Add '--continue' option as a synonym for 'git commit'
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 09:34:13PM +1300, Chris Packham wrote:
> Teach 'git merge' the --continue option which allows 'continuing' a
> merge by completing it. The traditional way of completing a merge after
> resolving conflicts is to use 'git commit'. Now with commands like 'git
> rebase' and 'git cherry-pick' having a '--continue' option adding such
> an option to 'git merge' presents a consistent UI.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Packham
> ---
> So here is a quick patch that adds the --continue option. I need to add
> some tests (suggestions for where to start are welcome).
I'm not sure if there's much to test besides concluding a successful
merge, and possibly some error cases where --continue should complain.
Probably that could go at the end of t7600.
> @@ -1166,6 +1169,18 @@ int cmd_merge(int argc, const char **argv, const char
> *prefix)
> goto done;
> }
>
> + if (continue_current_merge) {
> + int nargc = 1;
> + const char *nargv[] = {"commit", NULL};
> +
> + if (!file_exists(git_path_merge_head()))
> + die(_("There is no merge in progress (MERGE_HEAD
> missing)."));
> +
> + /* Invoke 'git commit' */
> + ret = cmd_commit(nargc, nargv, prefix);
> + goto done;
> + }
> +
I know this block is just adapted from the "--abort" one above, but
should both of these complain when other arguments are given? I can't
imagine what the user might mean with "git merge --no-commit
--continue", but probably it should be an error. :)
-Peff
Re: [RFC/PATCH] merge: Add '--continue' option as a synonym for 'git commit'
Am 12.12.2016 um 09:34 schrieb Chris Packham:
> Teach 'git merge' the --continue option which allows 'continuing' a
> merge by completing it. The traditional way of completing a merge after
> resolving conflicts is to use 'git commit'. Now with commands like 'git
> rebase' and 'git cherry-pick' having a '--continue' option adding such
> an option to 'git merge' presents a consistent UI.
Like.
While Junio is entirely right that this is redundant, the inner workings of Git
are just voodoo for a (guessed) 95% of users out there, so a consistent UI is
important.
> DESCRIPTION
> ---
> @@ -61,6 +62,9 @@ reconstruct the original (pre-merge) changes. Therefore:
> discouraged: while possible, it may leave you in a state that is hard to
> back out of in the case of a conflict.
>
> +The fourth syntax ("`git merge --continue`") can only be run after the
> +merge has resulted in conflicts. 'git merge --continue' will take the
> +currently staged changes and complete the merge.
I think this should mention the equivalence to 'git commit'.
Markus
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dipl. Ing. (FH) Markus Hitter
http://www.jump-ing.de/
[RFC/PATCH] merge: Add '--continue' option as a synonym for 'git commit'
Teach 'git merge' the --continue option which allows 'continuing' a
merge by completing it. The traditional way of completing a merge after
resolving conflicts is to use 'git commit'. Now with commands like 'git
rebase' and 'git cherry-pick' having a '--continue' option adding such
an option to 'git merge' presents a consistent UI.
Signed-off-by: Chris Packham
---
So here is a quick patch that adds the --continue option. I need to add
some tests (suggestions for where to start are welcome).
Documentation/git-merge.txt | 13 -
builtin/merge.c | 17 -
2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/git-merge.txt b/Documentation/git-merge.txt
index b758d5556..765b0f26e 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-merge.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-merge.txt
@@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ SYNOPSIS
[--[no-]rerere-autoupdate] [-m ] [...]
'git merge' HEAD ...
'git merge' --abort
+'git merge' --continue
DESCRIPTION
---
@@ -61,6 +62,9 @@ reconstruct the original (pre-merge) changes. Therefore:
discouraged: while possible, it may leave you in a state that is hard to
back out of in the case of a conflict.
+The fourth syntax ("`git merge --continue`") can only be run after the
+merge has resulted in conflicts. 'git merge --continue' will take the
+currently staged changes and complete the merge.
OPTIONS
---
@@ -99,6 +103,12 @@ commit or stash your changes before running 'git merge'.
'git merge --abort' is equivalent to 'git reset --merge' when
`MERGE_HEAD` is present.
+--continue::
+ Take the currently staged changes and complete the merge.
++
+'git merge --continue' is equivalent to 'git commit' when
+`MERGE_HEAD` is present.
+
...::
Commits, usually other branch heads, to merge into our branch.
Specifying more than one commit will create a merge with
@@ -277,7 +287,8 @@ After seeing a conflict, you can do two things:
* Resolve the conflicts. Git will mark the conflicts in
the working tree. Edit the files into shape and
- 'git add' them to the index. Use 'git commit' to seal the deal.
+ 'git add' them to the index. Use 'git merge --continue' to seal the
+ deal.
You can work through the conflict with a number of tools:
diff --git a/builtin/merge.c b/builtin/merge.c
index b65eeaa87..1ce18cbbe 100644
--- a/builtin/merge.c
+++ b/builtin/merge.c
@@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ static int option_renormalize;
static int verbosity;
static int allow_rerere_auto;
static int abort_current_merge;
+static int continue_current_merge;
static int allow_unrelated_histories;
static int show_progress = -1;
static int default_to_upstream = 1;
@@ -223,6 +224,8 @@ static struct option builtin_merge_options[] = {
OPT__VERBOSITY(&verbosity),
OPT_BOOL(0, "abort", &abort_current_merge,
N_("abort the current in-progress merge")),
+ OPT_BOOL(0, "continue", &continue_current_merge,
+ N_("continue the current in-progress merge")),
OPT_BOOL(0, "allow-unrelated-histories", &allow_unrelated_histories,
N_("allow merging unrelated histories")),
OPT_SET_INT(0, "progress", &show_progress, N_("force progress
reporting"), 1),
@@ -739,7 +742,7 @@ static void abort_commit(struct commit_list *remoteheads,
const char *err_msg)
if (err_msg)
error("%s", err_msg);
fprintf(stderr,
- _("Not committing merge; use 'git commit' to complete the
merge.\n"));
+ _("Not committing merge; use 'git merge --continue' to complete
the merge.\n"));
write_merge_state(remoteheads);
exit(1);
}
@@ -1166,6 +1169,18 @@ int cmd_merge(int argc, const char **argv, const char
*prefix)
goto done;
}
+ if (continue_current_merge) {
+ int nargc = 1;
+ const char *nargv[] = {"commit", NULL};
+
+ if (!file_exists(git_path_merge_head()))
+ die(_("There is no merge in progress (MERGE_HEAD
missing)."));
+
+ /* Invoke 'git commit' */
+ ret = cmd_commit(nargc, nargv, prefix);
+ goto done;
+ }
+
if (read_cache_unmerged())
die_resolve_conflict("merge");
--
2.11.0
