Re: [PATCH] stash: allow custom conflict labels for pop

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

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

> On 30/09/2026 22:33, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> "Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>> This is not a new problem, but is it just me who finds this
>> "feature" more about "because we can do it", not "because we need to
>> have it"?  Stepping back a bit, why did we add these three options
>> to "stash apply" in the first place?
>
> So we could have meaningful conflict labels for "git checkout -m".

Yes, I know (as I already written in the part you quoted below your
"Thanks").  What I didn't realize was that we spawned "git stash
apply" as a subprocess from sequencer, not as an internal subroutine
call, in do_stash_apply().  Of course, with that calling sequence,
we do need to expose these options to "git stash apply".

>> If there is no good use case, perhaps what we should be doing is to
>> remove from "git stash apply" these three options, not adding the
>> same to another command.
>
> I think having better labels for commands that are autostashing is a 
> good use case for adding labels to "apply" but I'm not convinced there 
> is a good use case for "pop". As you say below is anyone really going to 
> type out the labels when they pop a stash? Scripts should probably be 
> using "create" and "apply" rather than "push" and "pop" so are already 
> covered.

Yup.