From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Stashing individual files Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2012 12:08:52 -0800 Message-ID: <7vfwfwtup7.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20120103190612.GC20926@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Chris Leong , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jan 03 21:09:00 2012 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 1RiAfM-0003Aj-11 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 03 Jan 2012 21:09:00 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754868Ab2ACUI4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jan 2012 15:08:56 -0500 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:41929 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754731Ab2ACUIz (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jan 2012 15:08:55 -0500 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86F8D6264; Tue, 3 Jan 2012 15:08:54 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=uH6cXaMJ/sFGQhu1P2VwsAGVWWc=; b=joJSdp nKa6U6NmIibF8fdL/yOK4IWAg49B3CHrCKNeNM3sNKyAfwv31RAQ3vkPVLwluBuB 4/61h2pwDrWk9oTyAVQQ0TI3VqWsuJmed5b0meqBBNFfK2OyzMZVsCkqGRBZXzYa Rc3X5XRE8xkY6NQWRfQI8Q3MSUJD5d16e4tww= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=lUzp7X59liNLTrIB4jlJ36clko0WTq9d A/WtiajouMHAI5J3zJe9rQlSnBiDpGttKUdzlzzT++K+u63q/4wGupfifGY+71N1 w5HrtHEJVfvBWz45qhZevUrg0N/L0LKjxpO7/pku405bTlSLys/RXN1dZdbgVwTp RjodTUroIEc= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DF056263; Tue, 3 Jan 2012 15:08:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [76.102.170.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F151B6262; Tue, 3 Jan 2012 15:08:53 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20120103190612.GC20926@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Tue, 3 Jan 2012 14:06:12 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: C2B3B696-3646-11E1-BCD3-9DB42E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King writes: > I think that would be OK compromise, though. I'd rather not introduce a > whole new "stashfiles" command (or even a new subcommand of stash) if we > can avoid it. Why wouldn't a simple "git diff -- paths >P.diff" work? What does such a partial stash leave in the working tree, how does the user deal with the remaining local changes, what happens after such a partial stash is applied/popped? I wouldn't have worried about such a change before e0e2a9c (stash: drop dirty worktree check on apply, 2011-04-05) but now we allow application of stashed changes to the dirty working tree (which is a very good thing), I am not sure how sensibly these changes in different places would interact if we start supporting partial stashing.