Re: [RFC] git stash: add porcelain for sharing stashes through remotes

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Oct 5, 2026, 15:25 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqzewsmaod.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <CAKPibBwjRSb5cXd2iWo8bbYby1odcXNazEg-D9hcqbehrR6g3w@mail.gmail.com>

Hanan Arshad <hananarshad619@gmail.com> writes:

Show 6 quoted lines

> The narrower proposal I am considering now is only around the parts of
> the temporary handoff workflow that are less convenient today:
>
> - discovering available remote stash refs,
> - fetching one and storing it as a normal local stash entry,
> - removing the remote ref when it is no longer needed.

FWIW, I agree with j6t. Quoting the part you left at the bottom of your message (by the way, please do not top-post on this list. You quote what others said first, and then you write your response below that):

Show 6 quoted lines

>> So, IMHO, there is zero reason to upgrade stashes so that they can
>> achieve the exact same thing that we can already do with branches.
>>
>> (Hence, if indeed you do share your half-finsihed work ten times a day,
>> then, please, by all means, use the right tool for the task: put your
>> work on a branch, not in a stash.)

All of the three you listed (discovery, transfer, clean-up) become easier to work with if you used branches, branches have always had good support for these three (and other) operations, and I do not see a good reason to add a parallel support to do something similar.