Resurrecting an old git-stash discussion

[David Aguilar <davvid@gmail.com>]

A long time ago there was a patch that made git-stash
configurable:

http://lists.zerezo.com/git/msg641406.html


Junio's conclusion at the time was:

"The decision here is that I am open to a change that
implements the one-time safety instruction."

http://lists.zerezo.com/git/msg641442.html

Would this be something worth implementing after this
release cycle?

If so, would this be the basic logic?:


If stash.quick is undefined:
- Alert the user to what's going on
- Ask them whether they'd like to enable the quick behavior,
  or exit (thus leaving stash.quick undefined).

Valid values for stash.quick are then either undefined
or 'save'.

Is it still a good idea to implement the one-time
safety instruction?

I just thought I'd ask.  Why?
A co-worker ran into this funny situation last week:

	git branch
	git stash  # oops, didn't mean that

	git stash help # prints usage, though only by luck
	git branch help # oops, didn't mean that

There's a limit to guarding against the uneducated and by no
means do I think the 2nd "oops"'s behavior should be changed.
With the proposed change we would've warned him at the first
"oops", and that's better than nothing.

The above is a silly example despite the fact that it
actually happened.  'rm help' happily removes your 'help'
file.  I just figured I'd mention it since maybe instead of
printing usage stash should also warn:

	Error: unknown command 'help'.
	Run 'git help stash' for more information.


Regarding the 'first time warning' thing:

  97bc00a: Emit helpful status for accidental "git stash" save

..seems like it already addressed the issue by telling
users how to apply the stash.  That makes the case for
the first-time-warning much less compelling.

Hmm.. maybe I just answered my own question ;)


The "unknown command 'help'" thing might be good nonetheless,
though.


-- 
		David