Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] stash: fix and improve "git stash -p <pathspec>"

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes:

> From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk>
>
> "git stash -p <pathspec>" should imply "git stash push -p <pathspec>"
> but that was broken by a code cleanup in c3713cede7 (stash: eliminate
> crude option parsing, 2020-02-17). This regression is fixed in the
> first patch. Although "-p" implies the "push" subcommand "--patch"
> has never implied "push". That is fixed in the second patch.
>
> Thanks to Junio for his comments on V1.
>
> Changes since V1:
>  - Split out the regression fix into its own patch
>
> Base-Commit: 1a8a4971cc6c179c4dd711f4a7f5d7178f4b3ab7
> Published-As: https://github.com/phillipwood/git/releases/tag/pw%2Fstash-assume-push-with-dash-p%2Fv2
> View-Changes-At: https://github.com/phillipwood/git/compare/1a8a4971c...98ad3de97
> Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/phillipwood/git pw/stash-assume-push-with-dash-p/v2
>
>
> Phillip Wood (2):
>   stash: allow "git stash -p <pathspec>" to assume push again
>   stash: allow "git stash [<options>] --patch <pathspec>" to assume push

Are other people interested in this work?  I haven't seen any
comments other than a few nitpicky one form mine, and want to (1)
gauge the interest in the fix, and (2) see how well reviewed it is
(and my review or reading over the patches again would not count all
that much here).

Thanks.