Re: [PATCH] doc: explain the impact of stash.index on --autostash options

From: D. Ben Knoble <ben.knoble@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 14, 2025, 02:18 UTC
Message-ID: <CALnO6CDULtw1UmqHfiqLCH4v6U=MuiECHhYwz1-Omkh8x=9yFg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <d4dc8042-b996-4889-88cb-f0862a12d09c@app.fastmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 8:18 AM Kristoffer Haugsbakk <code@khaugsbakk.name> wrote:

Show 18 quoted lines

>
> On Sun, Oct 12, 2025, at 20:04, Ben Knoble wrote:
> >>>[snip]
> >>
> >> Yeah, that is less useful to me (there is a tool, given a commit
> >> object, to figure out at which merge it got merged to the mainline);
> >> I didn't think of a way the information can be useful to general
> >> readers.  If the mainline merge was a release or more ago, then it
> >> may make sense to say "commit X, which appeared in version Y, was
> >> broken in such and such way, and here is to fix its breakage"
> >
> > It’s not clear to me if you’d like to see a v2 or not, but given you
> > were already happy to merge in the latest what’s cooking, I don’t mind
> > not sending one ;)
>
> Sorry.  I misread a What’s Cooking email[1] as asking why a topic hadn’t
> been picked up. But you were asking about sending another patch on top
> of something which was already in `next`.

Apologies. That's probably my poor wording.

> I wouldn’t have sent that email if I knew it was already in `next` (if I
> had checked better).

Anything I can do to make it easier next time? Appreciate the review, btw :)

-- 
D. Ben Knoble