From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Markus Elfring Subject: Re: [PATCH] Clarification for the command "git checkout " Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:15:26 +0100 Message-ID: <4BA3329E.6050304@web.de> References: <4B67227A.7030908@web.de> <4B898F97.90706@web.de> <7vr5o6s5xf.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <4B8B9BF1.10408@web.de> <4b8bf32f.0706c00a.26cb.691d@mx.google.com> <4BA104C7.5020207@web.de> <32541b131003170944w7a0215frcace205f32d313bf@mail.gmail.com> <7vaau6q18q.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <4BA1FC39.10300@web.de> <32541b131003180936x746dad06k386788d3cb6fcdeb@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Avery Pennarun , Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Michael Witten X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Mar 19 09:15:49 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NsXMu-0001u5-Nr for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:15:45 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752117Ab0CSIPg (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Mar 2010 04:15:36 -0400 Received: from fmmailgate02.web.de ([217.72.192.227]:42080 "EHLO fmmailgate02.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751280Ab0CSIPe (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Mar 2010 04:15:34 -0400 Received: from smtp07.web.de (fmsmtp07.dlan.cinetic.de [172.20.5.215]) by fmmailgate02.web.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2ADF1560B698; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:15:31 +0100 (CET) Received: from [78.49.72.233] (helo=[192.168.1.2]) by smtp07.web.de with asmtp (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (WEB.DE 4.110 #4) id 1NsXMh-0003qs-00; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:15:31 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091204 Thunderbird/3.0 In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: Markus.Elfring@web.de X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+olnrwNs6jJ2B4vFWKo2iIDRfBazWL02m6oJ2K Q4EMYmDJ3Ta9DFF5vmvzO14L8rkvfJyhXj+0U+BN3TVmfiWhPW 4cE5VQthQCImTDaejyvA== Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: > Are you not reading? Are you not comprehending? Are you trolling? I answer these three questions with "NO". I find that the discussion is not finished yet. It was not achieved a common conclusion and consensus on all mentioned details so far. >> stashing isn't really something you'd want to do on a per-branch >> basis. Most of the point is that you stash away your changes, then >> switch to another branch, then restore your stash to your *current* >> working state sometime later. I have got different expectations. I would expect that there are enough intermediate work results available to justify a stash per branch so that unwanted "temporary" or "throw-away" commits can be avoided. > As you may know, "git checkout" carries local modifications to the new > working tree if there are no conflicts, so no explicit stash usage is > necessary in many cases. Various software projects have got different amounts of uncommitted changes between branches. > Anyway, I think it would be useful to be able to manage multiple > stashes rather than having to rely on just one global stash. However, > I imagine than explicit Work In Progress (WIP) commits as sketched > above would go a long way in keeping histories and workflows clean > and organized. I am also interested in improvements for this feature request. Does a "WIP" really need a commit to get the unfinished changes stored? Regards, Markus