git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: git stash apply usability issues

From
Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Date
Oct 19, 2007, 01:31 UTC
Message-ID
<20071019013156.GU14735@spearce.org>
In-Reply-To
<47171A21.9030003@viscovery.net>
Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net> wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> (2) when 'git stash apply' runs merge-recursive, it treats the current 
> state as 'ours' and the stash as 'theirs'. IMHO it should be the other way 
> round: I have stashed away changes to a binary file. Then committed a 
> different modification to it, and now want to apply the stash. This results 
> in a conflict that leaves the current state in the working tree, but I had 
> preferred that the stashed binary file were in the working tree now.
> 
> What do other git-stash users think about changing the order?

The current order is the same order that git-rebase uses. I'm not saying its correct, just that its the same as rebase. I think rebase is also backwards and if we change git-stash we should also change git-rebase at the same time (though probably not in the same commit).

-- 
Shawn.
Previous: Steven GrimmNext: Karl Hasselström
Message 3 of 8 in “git stash apply usability issues”
  1. Johannes SixtOct 18, 2007
  2. Steven GrimmOct 18, 2007
  3. Shawn O. PearceOct 19, 2007
  4. Karl HasselströmOct 19, 2007
  5. David KastrupOct 19, 2007
  6. Avoid invoking diff drivers during git-stashShawn O. Pearce, Oct 19, 2007
  7. Johannes SixtOct 19, 2007
  8. Shawn O. PearceOct 19, 2007

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.