From: Shawn Pearce Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 05:27:28 GMT Subject: Re: The git newbie experience Message-ID: <20060515052728.GA28068@spearce.org> In-Reply-To: <44680C54.8040206@inoi.fi> Tommi Virtanen wrote: > Junio C Hamano wrote: [snip] > > - Jack stashes away what he has been working on and cleans up > > his mess. > > > > git diff >P.diff > > git checkout HEAD A B C > ... > > - Jack then reapplies what he stashed away with "git apply P.diff" > > and keeps working. > > > > Maybe "git stash" command that does "git diff --full-index" with > > some frills, and "git unstash" command which does an equivalent > > of "git am -3" would help this workflow (bare "git apply" does > > not do the three-way merge like am does). > > Oh, I'd love to have a quick stash, that's what we actually ended up > doing a lot. Although I'd rather see a real implementation use a branch > and not just a diff file, but.. yes please. > > Although, "git stash" and "git unstash" are yet another command to add > to the newbie set, and I just complained about the size of the set ;) This is perhaps one area where SVN's user interface is actually nice. SVN's equiv. of stash is making a copy of your working directory into the repository; something that is rather simple to do for the user. What about "git commit -b foo -a" to commit the current working directory to branch 'foo'? Then restoring is a pull of foo ("git pull . foo"), but that intermediate commit is now part of the repository history. And "git commit -a" doesn't automatically add extra/other files to the repository and it probably should in the case of a "stash". -- Shawn.