From: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2013 19:06:51 GMT
Subject: Re: RFC: allowing multiple parallel sequencers
Message-ID: <20130402190651.GA17620@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
In-Reply-To: <7v38v8eriz.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 11:06:28AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com> writes:
> 
> > 	I've recently started looking into the possibility of having git support
> > multiple in-progress sequencers, and wanted to solicit opinions for how best to
> > do it.... The thoughts I had were:
> >
> > 1) A per branch sequence directory...
> > 2) Augment the git-stash command...
> 
> 3) A per branch working tree.
> 
> That is how I would do this myself, anyway ;-)
> 
Not sure I completely follow.  Are you suggesting that all untracked
files, indexes and meta data in .git be saved during a branch switch?

Thanks
Neil