From: Nadav Goldstein <nadav.goldstein96@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2023 10:57:02 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add 'preserve' subcommand to 'git stash'
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:
> 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
>
>