Michael J Gruber <g...@drmicha.warpmail.net> writes:
>> It can be read that
>> $ git cherry-pick maint next
>> would pick two single commits, while
>> $ git cherry-pick maint next ^master
>> could implicitly be read as
>> $ git cherry-pick maint next --do-walk ^master
You can read it as "master..next maint" that does force walking.
>> Clearly that's not what is intended, which is
>> $ git cherry-pick --do-walk maint next ^master
I do not see the distinction betwee the above two you seem to be
trying to make. Care to explain?
>> but it is open to interpretation as to where in the command line the caret
>> range prefix's --do-walk (to countermand the --no-walk) should applied.
I do not think it can be position dependent. Philip probably has a
confused notion that "rev-list A..B C..D" is somehow a union of set
A..B and C..D?
>> If the user did want just the single commit at the tip of maint, and then
>> the range master..next, what would be their command line, and also, how
>> would the man page warn against false expectations?
Yeah, this can show us that all of the have is coming from that
exact confusion I suspected Philip has. We need to clarify in the
documentation that rev-list set operation does *NOT* have union of
multiple sets to unconfuse the readers.