From: Oswald Buddenhagen Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2023 20:03:56 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add 'preserve' subcommand to 'git stash' Message-ID: In-Reply-To: On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 09:42:41AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >"Nadav Goldstein via GitGitGadget" writes: >> In this patch, we introduce a new subcommand preserve to >> git stash. The purpose of this subcommand is to save the >> current changes into the stash and then immediately re-apply >> those changes to the working directory. > >Why a new subcommand, not a new option to "push"? Adding a new >subcommand would mean it would be another unfamiliar thing users >need to learn, as opposed to a slight variation of what they are >already familiar with. > to be fair, there's also `apply` and not `pop --keep`. of course, `preserve` seems a bit unspecific, but `save` and `create` are already taken. >> If the community will approve, I will modify the patch to include >> help >> messages for the new subcommand > >Please don't think this way. If the new feature is not worth >completing to document and tests for your own use, it is not worth >community's time to review or "approve" it. > for one's own use, one usually wouldn't do the polishing. >Instead, we try to send a patch that is already perfected, with tests >and docs, > it's nice when "we" do that, but i think that this is a somewhat too one-sided committment to *ask* for. >in order to improve the chance reviewers will understand the new >feature and its motivation better when they review the patch. > i think one can achieve that without doing the full monty. that's what the design-driven process is for, after all. the crux is at what contribution size one considers it "worth it", but you can be sure that drive-by contributors have a significantly lower threshold than regulars. i'm not saying that nadav succeeded, but a focus on final artifacts alone is unlikely to have changed anything. regards, ossi