From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] Document git-stash Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 00:10:46 -0400 Message-ID: <20070702041046.GB17384@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <200707010533.l615XiH6006728@mi1.bluebottle.com> <20070701080757.GA6093@coredump.intra.peff.net> <7vlkdz4wp3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: =?utf-8?B?44GX44KJ44GE44GX44Gq44Gq44GT?= , GIT , Johannes Schindelin To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jul 02 06:10:54 2007 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1I5DFS-0006lk-HT for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 02 Jul 2007 06:10:50 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750745AbXGBEKs (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jul 2007 00:10:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750728AbXGBEKs (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jul 2007 00:10:48 -0400 Received: from 66-23-211-5.clients.speedfactory.net ([66.23.211.5]:3693 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750699AbXGBEKs (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jul 2007 00:10:48 -0400 Received: (qmail 10656 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2007 04:11:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net with (DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 2 Jul 2007 04:11:08 -0000 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 02 Jul 2007 00:10:46 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vlkdz4wp3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 02:54:00PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > I would further suggest that we _require_ 'git stash save' to > create a new one and perhaps make the non-subcommand case run > 'git stash list'. While I was trying the code out I > accidentally created a new stash when I did not mean to, which > pushed the stash I wanted to apply down in the list every time I > made such a mistake. I think that makes sense...it's somehow cleaner to me if the non-subcommand case doesn't make any changes (maybe just because I like to explore commands by running them). I see you have already applied this change. However, you missed a spot in the documentation. Patch will follow, along with a couple of minor cleanups for the script. -Peff