Re: [PATCH v2] stash: expose untracked modes in create

From: 重田一聖 <kazumasa.shigeta@kanamei.com>
Date: Oct 10, 2026, 06:34 UTC
Message-ID: <CANUHOw0bc75HBqbvmbyeCMNF-2cJa3y5Km6MmwsiGTwHMwLULQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqqzhyoftg.fsf@gitster.g>

> 'git stash create' does not have to be fully capable of doing
> so with the current topic alone, but do you agree that improving
> 'create' in such a way should be our long-term goal?

Yes, I agree.

> Shouldn't 'stash create --foo' work the same way as
> 'stash push --foo' while creating the stash entry, if '--foo' is
> not an option relevant only to 'stash store'?

Yes, that's exactly what I had in mind.

> If the wish is "we want to start small because thinking about
> each and every one of them and making sure they work correctly
> is too much work for my liking", I would understand.

Yes, that is what I meant. When you asked why I was singling out `-u` and `-a`, I went back and examined the other options. I'm glad I did. It helped me understand `stash create` better. Thank you for raising that question.

But when I tried to explain why I wanted to leave the other options out, I gave a poor reason. Sorry for the confusion.

With that in mind, I'd like to limit this patch to `-m/-q/-u/-a` and leave `--patch`, `--staged`, and pathspec support for follow-up patches. Does that sound reasonable?

Thanks, Kazumasa Shigeta