Phillip Wood <phillip.wood...@gmail.com> writes:

>> This one, and the in_progress_advice emitted from the patch 1/5, are
>> both bad in that they make calls to advise() without guarding it
>> with an advice.* configuration variable.
>
> I'm not sure we have one for cherry-pick/revert/rebase. At the moment
> they print advice advice for a failed pick unconditionally...

Yes, 1/5 does not introduce a new problem; it just makes it worse by
allowing the misdesign survive another update.  The one introduced
by 4/5 is genuinely new.

> ... Maybe that
> should be checking advice.resolveConflict though.

I think that is a sensible one, rather than inventing a new knob.

Reply via email to