From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH] Document git-stash Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 23:57:20 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: 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: Jeff King , =?utf-8?B?44GX44KJ44GE44GX44Gq44Gq44GT?= , GIT To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jul 02 00:57:32 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 1I58ME-0005HJ-Mn for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 02 Jul 2007 00:57:31 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751732AbXGAW52 (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Jul 2007 18:57:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753243AbXGAW52 (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Jul 2007 18:57:28 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:52957 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751732AbXGAW51 (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Jul 2007 18:57:27 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 01 Jul 2007 22:57:25 -0000 Received: from wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de (EHLO localhost) [132.187.25.13] by mail.gmx.net (mp019) with SMTP; 02 Jul 2007 00:57:25 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18KvDQ8+HQKIPNKYHv/y9zS266iq4p7DTFtTsY7JE h7WDmUnOG8SIpU X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <7vlkdz4wp3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Sun, 1 Jul 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > >> +(no subcommand):: > >> + > >> + Save your local modifications to a new 'stash', and run `git-reset > >> + --hard` to revert them. > > > > For orthogonality's sake, should this be 'git-stash save', aliased to > > just 'git-stash'? It would make this heading a little more intuitive, > > and the very first paragraph (describing all of the modes) a little more > > clear. > > 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. Well, the normal thing you want to do if you say "git stash" is best described by "Git, stash!". However, unstash would by a nice feature. Not easy, but nice. Not easy, because we would be actively outsmarting the reflog machinery we use for the stash. Ciao, Dscho