From: Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 03:00:38 GMT
Subject: Re: `git stash pop` UX Problem
Message-ID: <85bnxs0wmh.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqd2i94qfq.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

> ...  So "resolve the conflicts" is assuming the intention of
> the user who issued "pop" too much (let alone "manually"---it does
> not matter how the user resolves conflicts---the only thing we want
> to say is Git did all it would and no further automated help in
> resolving is availble, but "manually" is not quite the word).

+1

> "The stash was not dropped" is the most important thing in your
> additional text.  How about rephrasing like this?
>
>     $ git stash pop
>     Auto-merging foo.txt
>     CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in foo.txt
>
>     The stashed change could not be replayed cleanly, leaving
>     conflicts in the working tree. The stash was not dropped in case
>     you need it again.
>
>     After you are done with the stash, you may want to "git stash
>     drop" to discard it.

+1

-- 
-- Stephe