Re: [PATCH 2/2] git-rebase.txt: clarify that --abort checks out <branch>

[Drew Northup <drew.northup@maine.edu>]

On Fri, 2011-07-01 at 22:38 -0400, Martin von Zweigbergk wrote:
> The description for 'git rebase --abort' currently says:
> 
>     Restore the original branch and abort the rebase operation.
> 
> The "restore" can be misinterpreted to imply that the original branch
> was somehow in a broken state during the rebase operation. 

When you are in the middle of a rebase you _are_not_on_any_branch_. This
is why "Restore the original branch" is used. I have to admit that it
could potentially be clearer, but your solution alas is not.

> It is also
> not completely clear what "the original branch" is --- is it the
> branch that was checked out before the rebase operation was called or
> is the the branch that is being rebased (it is the latter)? Although
> both issues are made clear in the DESCRIPTION section, let us also
> make the entry in the OPTIONS secion more clear, like so:
> 
>     Abort the rebase operation and check out <branch>.

So when I rebase I'm really checking out another branch--which, just to
increase confusion, doesn't actually exist? What if there isn't another
branch (rebase -i on a single-branch repo, for instance)? This doesn't
solve the problem.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Martin von Zweigbergk <martin.von.zweigbergk@gmail.com>
> ---
> 
> This was basically suggested by Jonathan in [1] ('git rebase
> --discard'/'git rebase --abort --stay' or whatever it should be
> called). Since I have not had much time for Git lately, I thought I
> would just post these two patches for now, in case it will take time
> before I get a chance to move even the simple work in [1] forward.
> 
> 
>  [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/174655/focus=174683

-- 
-Drew Northup
________________________________________________
"As opposed to vegetable or mineral error?"
-John Pescatore, SANS NewsBites Vol. 12 Num. 59