On Oct 7, 2014, at 12:17 AM, Michal Labedzki <michal.labedzki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I think that "Conflicts:" should be kept. It has some values. It means
> that cherry-pick/merge is not clean, so human or machine try to
> resolve conflicts. It may fail.
When I see it, "Conflicts:" just means "you'll have to try to manually resolve the conflicts and, if you can't, just give up and either don't do anything or reimplement the fix atop the older code base". Once that's done, there aren't any conflicts any more, so....
> Also Conflicts say: "be careful, maybe
> you do not want to cherry-pick this commit" (or... maybe you want this
> commit if destination branch is close to branch with this cherry-pick
> [so maybe no/or less number of conflicts]).
That's the same thing - "you'll have to try to manually resolve the conflicts and, if you can't, just give up and either don't do anything or reimplement the fix atop the older code base".
> Also I propose to use "git cherry-pick -x"
> when do cherry-pick to non-main branches (like master-1.10, etc.) See
> description:
> " -x
> When recording the commit, append a line that says "(cherry
> picked from commit ...)" to the original commit message in order to
> indicate which commit this change was cherry-picked from.
That appears to happen automatically when you use Gerrit to do the cherry-pick.
