Re: [PATCH] builtin/stash: configs keepIndex, includeUntracked

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Feb 21, 2024, 23:53 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqzfvtjrvs.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq4je1o9yu.fsf@gitster.g>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

Show 16 quoted lines

> Ricardo C <rpc01234@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Permanently enabling keepIndex is mainly intended for people that like
>> to stash their unstaged changes before committing (e.g., for testing
>> them independently of other changes). The main issue with what you
>> recommend is that, if they forget to use `-k`, then the entire state
>> of the index is lost, which is especially problematic if the changes
>> were interactively staged.
>
> Doesn't "git stash pop --index" meant to recover from such a
> mistake, though?  If you stash, because your "git commit" notices
> there is no change after you did "git stash" without "-k", your
> recovery to "pop --index" would apply the changes to the index and
> to the working tree on top of exactly the same commit, so there is
> no risk of losing any changes by doing so, right?  IOW, such a pop
> will always round-trip.

Actually, "git commit" gets into the picture of making and recovering from such a mistake a bit more costly than I made it sound in the above. My bad.

The common sequence is

    $ edit edit edit
    $ git add -p
    $ git stash -k
    $ build what is in the index and test

and then when you are happy, conclude it with

    $ git commit [NO -o/-i/pathspec]

followed by

    $ git stash pop

to continue for the next commit. So "git commit" should notice if your earlier "stash -k" forgot to say "-k", but by that time, you would have wasted the whole build and test cycle. The HEAD wouldn't have moved, so the conclusion that "pop --index" would be a good way to recover from "stash" without "--keep" does not change, though.