From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 21:54:00 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Document git-stash
Message-ID: <7vlkdz4wp3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <20070701080757.GA6093@coredump.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

>> +(no subcommand)::
>> +
>> +	Save your local modifications to a new 'stash', and run `git-reset
>> +	--hard` to revert them.
>
> For orthogonality's sake, should this be 'git-stash save', aliased to
> just 'git-stash'? It would make this heading a little more intuitive,
> and the very first paragraph (describing all of the modes) a little more
> clear.

I would further suggest that we _require_ 'git stash save' to
create a new one and perhaps make the non-subcommand case run
'git stash list'.  While I was trying the code out I
accidentally created a new stash when I did not mean to, which
pushed the stash I wanted to apply down in the list every time I
made such a mistake.