Re: [PATCH v3] Introduced force flag to the git stash clear subcommand.

From: Nadav Goldstein <nadav.goldstein96@gmail.com>
Date: Jun 20, 2023, 19:54 UTC
Message-ID: <1540e884-08c7-922e-1fd9-65616268c1c9@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqy1keodjj.fsf@gitster.g>

Show 16 quoted lines

> I am not sure how much value users would get by requiring "--force",
> though.  I know this was (partly) modeled after "git clean", but
> over there, when the required "--force" is not given, the user would
> give "--dry-run" (or "-n"), and the user will see what would be
> removed if the user gave "--force".  If missing "--force" made "git
> stash clear" show the stash entries that would be lost, then after
> seeing an error message, it would be easier for the user to decide
> if their next move should be to re-run the command with "--force",
> or there are some precious entries and the user is not ready to do
> "stash clear".
>
> But just refusing to run without giving any other information will
> just train the user to give "git stash clear --force" without
> thinking, because getting "because you did not give the required
> --force option, I am not doing anything" is only annoying without
> giving any useful information.

I see, but isn't the same argument apply for git clean? if not adding the force flag, the same message as I wrote appear in git clean (I copied it from there), and it will exit without any other information, hence given your argument, running git clean is also not very useful.

One can argue that git clean --dry-run == git stash list

I suggested in the beginning of this thread to ask the user if he is sure he want to proceed (default to no), and only if he wrote y/yes proceed with the action (and force will just do it, or requireforce=false).

The reason I suggested it is because when running git stash clear, it will remain in the user recent commands, and when the user will navigate through the commands history in the terminal, he might accidentally fire git stash clear, and this confirmation will be another safeguard against this mistake.

Maybe it will be useful for git clean as well for the same reasons. Also when the user types git clean, I argue he wanted to clean or he did it by mistake, and In both scenarios I don't see why making git clean just fail will be useful.

So what do you think? Maybe we should present in both clean and clear a confirmation message? (only if requireforce=true)

What do you think?