Re: [PATCH] stash: git stash create and git stash store added to git stash usage synopsys
Scott Schmit <i.grok@comcast.net> writes:
[administrivia: please refrain from using Mail-follow-up-to]
Show 25 quoted lines
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 11:54:06PM +0600, Alexander Kuleshov wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kuleshov <kuleshovmail@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> git-stash.sh | 4 +++-
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/git-stash.sh b/git-stash.sh
>> index 6846b18..6e30380 100755
>> --- a/git-stash.sh
>> +++ b/git-stash.sh
>> @@ -9,7 +9,9 @@ USAGE="list [<options>]
>> or: $dashless branch <branchname> [<stash>]
>> or: $dashless [save [--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-q|--quiet]
>> [-u|--include-untracked] [-a|--all] [<message>]]
>> - or: $dashless clear"
>> + or: $dashless clear
>> + or: $dashless create [<message>]
>> + or: $dashless store [-m|--message <message>] [-q|--quiet] <commit>"
>>
>> SUBDIRECTORY_OK=Yes
>> OPTIONS_SPEC=
>
> Considering the man page says create & store are intended for scripts
> and "probably not the command you want to use", why would we want it in
> the synopsis?
With the understanding that these are only for scripters, I think we can agree that we do want to describe them in the manual pages, and we do not want them in the completion.
I feel "git stash -h" output is on the borderline, and can be argued both ways:
- When you script and are not clear how a command you wanted to use
in your script is to be used, it wouldn't be a crime to ask the
short "git stash -h" form (instead of the full manual page "git
stash --help") to remind how the command line ought to be
spelled.
- When you are not interested in script at all, from the command
line you may want to be reminded how to spell the subcommand with
"git stash -h" form. Having "store" listed, which will never be
what you want in this scenario, will be confusing. You want to
see "save".
So, I dunno.
Alexander Kuleshov