{"thread":{"id":"23362","subject":"Stashes and expiring reflogs","startedAt":"2010-04-06T21:07:40Z","lastAt":"2010-04-06T21:07:40Z","messageCount":1,"participants":["James Widman"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"138780","messageId":"loom.20100406T225419-205@post.gmane.org","threadId":"23362","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"Stashes and expiring reflogs","fromName":"James Widman","fromEmail":"widman@gimpel.com","sentAt":"2010-04-06T21:07:40Z","receivedAt":"2010-04-06T21:07:40Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"widman@gimpel.com","avatar":null},"body":"Hi all,\n\nWhen I read this:\n\n       \"The latest stash you created is stored in refs/stash; older\n       stashes are found in the reflog [...]\"\n\n... in the man page for git-stash, I started to feel a bit concerned,\nbecause this seems to imply that old stashes could be pruned.  But I\ncouldn't find any discussion on this issue in the documentation.  I\neventually found this thread:\n\nhttp://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/84665\n\n... which was enlightening, but didn't really give me a clue as to\nwhat the intended behavior is for the current version (1.7.0.4).\nNanako presented a possible solution here:\n\nhttp://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/85055\n\n... but it does not seem to have been merged into the current version.\n\nEven if that isn't adopted, it would be good for the documentation to\nbe clear about whether old stashes can be silently pruned.  I would\noffer to write the documentation patch myself, but I would need\ndirection from someone, and it would probably take them less time to\njust write it themselves.  (:\n"}]}