From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] git-gc: skip stashes when expiring reflogs Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 05:10:40 -0400 Message-ID: <20080613091040.GB4474@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20080611230344.GD19474@sigill.intra.peff.net> <6413041E-A64A-4BF4-9ECF-F7BFA5C1EAEF@wincent.com> <4851F6F4.8000503@op5.se> <20080613055800.GA26768@sigill.intra.peff.net> <48521EDA.5040802@op5.se> <20080613074257.GA513@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Andreas Ericsson , Wincent Colaiuta , Eric Raible , Git Mailing List , Nicolas Pitre To: sverre@rabbelier.nl X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jun 13 11:11:59 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1K75Jp-0006au-QR for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:11:38 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755271AbYFMJKn (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 05:10:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755049AbYFMJKn (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 05:10:43 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:2550 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754742AbYFMJKm (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 05:10:42 -0400 Received: (qmail 8840 invoked by uid 111); 13 Jun 2008 09:10:41 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 05:10:41 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 05:10:40 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 10:56:56AM +0200, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > > So of course my first question is "then why didn't you use a branch?" :) > > Because nobody / not everybody has perfect foresight, sometimes you > don't know in advance that what you thought was going to be a > temporary stash will turn into a long lived stash. What you are saying > is that really you should always create a branch, just in case your > temporary stash proved to be more long-lived than thought? Well, two things here: 1. I was being somewhat tounge in cheek with that comment. If you read the rest of the email, I was trying to figure out reasons why people are using "git stash" for long-term storage, to see if we could improve the branch interface or find a middle ground between temporary stashes and branches. 2. You don't need perfect foresight. Sometime in the thirty days (but probably about 5 minutes later) you realize "oh, this is some stashed work that I'm not going to deal with for a while" and you promote it to a topic branch. But then, I have good reason to want works-in-progress to become topic branches: I can then push them to a location which is backed up, and from which I can retrieve them if I want to access them from a different machine. Not everybody uses the same workflow. If you don't see any other benefits to topic branches, then the promotion is just a pain. -Peff