Re: git-stash: RFC: Adopt the default behavior to other commands

[Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>]

Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se> writes:
> Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Dec 2007, Andreas Ericsson wrote:
>>> Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>>>
>>>> In the alternative, you could just scrap all those default
>>>> actions, showing synopses instead.  For all commands, including
>>>> "git commit", "git log", "git fetch", etc.
>>>
>>> Like we do for the git wrapper, you mean? Yes, that would be one
>>> solution, although not a very good one for all commands.
>>
>> Exactly.  Not a good one.
>>
>>> It's probably not a bad idea for commands where the primary use is
>>> something else than producing visual output though, such as tag or
>>> branch, but those handle creation/deletion of stuff, so the default
>>> action for them is to list stuff of the kind they operate on. I
>>> fail to see why stash should be any different.
>>
>> I also fail to see why stash should be any different.  And that's why
>> I expect it to have a default operation, which is -- you guessed it -- 
>> "stash the changes!"
> 
> Actually, I guessed "list the stashes".
> 
>> If I am not sure what I am about to do, there is -- wonder of wonders -- 
>> the "-h" option!  And indeed:
>> 	$ git stash -h
>> 	Usage: /home/gitte/bin/git-stash [  | save | list | show |
>> apply | 		clear | create ]
>> So what exactly was your point again?
>>
> 
> My point is that it would be nice if all git commands that actually
> manipulate objects (create/delete/modify) had a safe default, and
> that experienced users such as yourself could endure the insufferable
> agony of retraining your fingers to type five more chars so that
> people won't have to get bitten by surprises.

Also for "git commit"?

In my opinion _basic_ usage of git-stash is simply using it with
one stash only: "git stash" / "git unstash" (i.e. "git stash apply";
by the way this is one (beside "git view") use case for builtin
predefined aliases).  Using it with multiple stashes (only then
"git stash list" is needed) is advanced usage; and for advanced
usage longer form is preferred, I think.

"git branch", "git log" and "git remote" are horse of differenc color
because the _cannot_ function without name of branch/tag/remote given,
so hey provide "list" when no name was given.

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Poland
ShadeHawk on #git