From: Neil Macneale <mac4-git@theory.org>
To: git <git@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: Stashing untracked files
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 20:59:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46FF1F1E.2050000@theory.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709292259070.28395@racer.site>
Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> [please do not cull me from the Cc: list, especially if you quote me.]
>
> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007, Neil Macneale wrote:
>
>> Performing an add would require me to remove those file from the index
>> at a later date in the event that I don't want to commit them on the
>> next commit.
>
> Wrong.
>
> If you "git add <new-file>" and then "git stash", it will no longer have
> the file in the index. Instead, the index will agree with the HEAD (which
> does not have <new-file>).
>
> Ciao,
> Dscho
To be a little more clear, this is why I'd like to stash untracked files.
$ <hack hack> # source tree is a mess
$ git stash -u # stash everything, even untracked files. I never
# suggesting modifying the default behavior.
$ <fix bug>
$ git commit -a
$ git stash apply
$ hack some more
$ git add file1 file2 # I'm ready for some things to be committed,
# but my source tree is still a mess.
$ git commit
To do what you are suggesting would be something like this (correct me
if I'm wrong):
$ <hack hack>
$ git add . # Additional step, not a big deal.
$ git stash
$ <fix bug>
$ git commit -a
$ git stash apply
$ git reset HEAD <all file I don't actually need to add but was forced
to add in step above.>
# What concerns me is that I may not reset some files
# that need to be reset, or reset other ones which
# should not be reset. This is the headache I want to
# avoid.
$ <hack hack>
$ git add file1 file2
$ git commit
git stash is an acknowledgment that not everything needs to be
committed, and sometimes working source trees are messy. Prior to the
stash command, I just accepted that I'd need to commit everything and do
some maintenance to un-commit those changes. stash is awesome for me
and the realities of the way I need to work. IMHO, it would be the best
thing since sliced bread if it handled untracked files.
If this is really just a problem for me, I can write a shell script to
do the dirty work. I just wonder if it is a common enough use case that
it merits support in the tool itself.
Cheers,
Neil
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-30 3:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-29 18:27 Stashing untracked files Neil Macneale
2007-09-29 21:03 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-09-29 21:10 ` Benoit SIGOURE
2007-09-29 21:46 ` Neil Macneale
2007-09-29 22:00 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-09-30 3:59 ` Neil Macneale [this message]
2007-09-30 8:41 ` Steffen Prohaska
2007-09-30 13:18 ` Wincent Colaiuta
2007-09-29 21:51 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-09-29 22:23 ` Tom Prince
2007-09-29 23:09 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-09-30 20:44 ` Tom Tobin
2007-09-30 21:25 ` Johannes Schindelin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=46FF1F1E.2050000@theory.org \
--to=mac4-git@theory.org \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.