Re: [PATCH] Add 'preserve' subcommand to 'git stash'
- From
Nadav Goldstein <nadav.goldstein96@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jun 18, 2023, 10:57 UTC
- Message-ID
- <8c3ca631-a33a-a64c-5152-249f6182a5c7@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <ZI7SzSuT26XXKzah@ugly>
I see your point, but commits force me to detail the changes (and I know it's good practice).
I just want to give the user another option rather than committing their changes.
If we talking about commits, why use stash at all? why not just commit, push it/create and switch branch, and go back?
I know my argument is not so smart, but I just want to highlight that everything can be done with commits, as this what makes git so powerful :)
Thanks for you reply!
Nadav
On 18/06/2023 12:47, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
Show 16 quoted lines
> On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 12:05:21PM +0300, Nadav Goldstein wrote: >> Let me try to explain my motivation: >> I heavily use stash to set quick points in my code so I could go back >> to them (during thought process), and I want to store my changes >> quickly and continue from there. >> > so why are you (ab-)using stash for that, rather than just committing > each time, and later cleaning it by using `reset [--mixed]` and > re-committing (or using `rebase --interactive`)? the reflog holds > information about "lost" commits (the stash is just a somewhat special > reflog, too). > > regards, > ossi > >