From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthieu Moy Subject: Re: `git stash pop` UX Problem Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:15:47 +0100 Message-ID: References: <530B0395.5030407@booking.com> <530C953F.9050805@booking.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Brandon McCaig , git@vger.kernel.org To: Omar Othman X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Feb 25 14:16:09 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WIHrh-0004rL-Up for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:16:06 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752705AbaBYNQA (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Feb 2014 08:16:00 -0500 Received: from mx1.imag.fr ([129.88.30.5]:57240 "EHLO shiva.imag.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751928AbaBYNQA (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Feb 2014 08:16:00 -0500 Received: from clopinette.imag.fr (clopinette.imag.fr [129.88.34.215]) by shiva.imag.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s1PDFkBP017596 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:15:46 +0100 Received: from anie.imag.fr (anie.imag.fr [129.88.7.32]) by clopinette.imag.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s1PDFlxb002307; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:15:47 +0100 In-Reply-To: <530C953F.9050805@booking.com> (Omar Othman's message of "Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:06:07 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0.1 (shiva.imag.fr [129.88.30.5]); Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:15:46 +0100 (CET) X-IMAG-MailScanner-Information: Please contact MI2S MIM for more information X-MailScanner-ID: s1PDFkBP017596 X-IMAG-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-IMAG-MailScanner-SpamCheck: X-IMAG-MailScanner-From: matthieu.moy@grenoble-inp.fr MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1393938949.07535@7EzflX94asLQzMtwzCp/tA Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Omar Othman writes: > Brandon: Please, don't top-post on this list. Look how other people answer to each other and follow the use. > Please note that what I am asking for is not always dropping the > stash, but doing that *only* when the merge conflict is resolved. This > is simply getting the whole command to be consistent. If you do `git > stash pop` and it succeeds, the stash reference is dropped. If you do > git stash pop` and it succeeds *after resolving the merge conflict*, > the stash reference is *not* dropped. This is *not* consistent and > *is* a user experience problem. I'm not asking about dumbing git down > by any means. Can you describe precisely what you would expect, e.g. what Git's output should look like after such and such command? -- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/