Re: [PATCH 0/5] Advice on checkout dirty files

>
> Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > If the intent is for the user to carry over the changes to the new
> > branch then recommending "git checkout -m" might be more convenient
> > rather than having to stash, checkout and unstash as three separate steps.
>
> I personally would not recommend pushing "-m" to new people without
> explaining its ramifications, though.
>
> If "git stash pop" fails while a commit different from the original
> is checked out, the working tree will get conflicts for you to
> resolve, and that is the same as "git checkout -m".  But the
> conflict may turn out to be too complex that you might not be able
> to cleanly resolve.
>
> With a "git stash pop" that gets interrupted by a conflict, the
> stash entry is not removed from the stash, so there is a clean
> recourse to "git reset --hard" away the conflict and attempting to
> unstash (either to the same commit or to a different base).
>
> With "git checkout -m", on the other hand, there is no such
> recourse.  The conflicted working tree with the unmerged index is
> all you get, and you get only a single chance to resolve it
> correctly.
>
> So...
>