Re: [BUG] StGit removed git branch of the same name as StGit branch

["J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>]

On Mon, Nov 20, 2006 at 11:37:54PM +0100, Jakub Narebski wrote:
> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > You probably actually had to "stg branch --delete --force", didn't you?
> 
> Nope. "stg branch --delete gitweb/web"
> 
> > What you want is "stg commit".
> 
> No. Whole stack was committed, I wanted only get rid of
> heads/base/gitweb/web (of StGit managed branch indicator).

Oh, right, got it.

> > The idea I guess was to make it possible to use stgit (and only stgit)
> > for everything, and never type a git command.  It might have been better
> > to make stgit only manage patch series, and admit that people should use
> > git for the rest.  Then it might work more like you expect.
> 
> Yes, I expected to use StGit as a kind of preprocessing (branch preparation)
> for git.

The multiple-porcelains idea seems like a mistake to me--it'd be fine if
you're just adding new features on the side, but who wants to learn
entirely different sets of commands, with subtly different syntax,
semantics, and feature sets, for doing the same thing?