From: Sverre Rabbelier Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 08:56:56 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] git-gc: skip stashes when expiring reflogs Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20080613074257.GA513@sigill.intra.peff.net> On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Jeff King wrote: > On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 09:16:42AM +0200, Andreas Ericsson wrote: >> To me, long-living stashes are useful because I can all of a sudden be >> pulled away from something I'm working on and set to work on something >> entirely different for up to 6 months (so far we haven't had a single >> emergency project run longer than that). It doesn't happen a lot, but >> it *does* happen. > > So of course my first question is "then why didn't you use a branch?" :) Because nobody / not everybody has perfect foresight, sometimes you don't know in advance that what you thought was going to be a temporary stash will turn into a long lived stash. What you are saying is that really you should always create a branch, just in case your temporary stash proved to be more long-lived than thought? -- Cheers, Sverre Rabbelier