Re: Usability of git stash

[Stephan Beyer <s-beyer@gmx.net>]

Hi,

Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
> Personally I wish git-stash wasn't invented the way it is.  I would
> have rather seen it as macros to do a quick:
> 
> 	git commit -m wip-index-state
> 	git commit -A -m wip-worktree-state
> 
> and unwind it with essentially:
> 
> 	git reset --mixed HEAD^
> 	git reset --soft HEAD^
> 
> then its a lot less black magic to users, as they can see it in the
> DAG, and its more explicitly tied to the branch they were on at the
> time they ran the stash.  I think its rare you'd stash something
> then switch to another branch to apply it.  But that could easily
> be done with cherry-pick.

Just a side note:
I, for example, have a stash in which some "valgrind ..." string is
prepended to some lines in some test scripts.  I apply the stash on
different branches and after testing I reset the file (or checkout -f
another branch).  I never really want to commit these changes.

So, the alternative for this use case (if there was no git-stash) is
to have a "valgrind" branch somewhere and do some "cherry-pick -n" of
those commits, right?

Hmm, it seems that this is the better way in the long run. But
"git-stash" seemed to be the natural way at first.

Regards,
  Stephan

-- 
Stephan Beyer <s-beyer@gmx.net>, PGP 0x6EDDD207FCC5040F