Re: [PATCH 2/2] git-gc: skip stashes when expiring reflogs

From: Brandon Casey <casey@nrlssc.navy.mil>
Date: Jun 12, 2008, 22:10 UTC
Message-ID: <fRW8sBboq1iMWGtwlFUpiDE6HkG2OzTHQ13Xtne_hLyGoZQw04GL7Q@cipher.nrlssc.navy.mil>
In-Reply-To: <7vhcbyz5pp.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> Brandon Casey <casey@nrlssc.navy.mil> writes:
> 
>> The fact that this caveat is not mentioned anywhere in the stash
>> documentation or anywhere in the commit log related to git-stash.sh makes
>> me think that this idea of 'a limited amount of time' was possibly not a
>> design decision but merely a side effect of stashes being implemented using the
>> reflog. Of course I didn't pay any attention to the discussions about stash
>> back when it was implemented, so I may definitely be wrong.
> 
> I do not deeply care either way, but perhaps
> 
>  http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/50737/focus=50863

Ahh, you reveal that you were not always a supporter of "stash per branch" in this thread. :)

> and yes use of reflog was more or less conscious thing and the mechanism
> is very much temporary in nature

I see. Thanks for the reference.

> (see the use case stated in the starting
> thread).

Yes, I understand the use case. I am just not convinced that a persistent stash would be detrimental, but I also do not care deeply.

Show 15 quoted lines

>> it were true that if I were to create a stash today, and then be surprised 30
>> days from now when I do a 'stash list' and find the stash is still there.
>> Something along the lines of:
>>
>>    $ git stash save my work
>>    # wait 30 days
>>    $ git stash list
>>    stash@{0}: WIP on master: my work
>>
>>    # and if my reaction were something like:
>>    # hmm, that's strange, what is that stash still doing there? It's been 30 days,
>>    # it should be gone.
> 
> We could prune before running "git stash list", but why bother?  The fact
> you can see it is like a bonus.

hmph :)

-brandon