# git checkout --autostash and git branch --autopop 7 messages from 2019-12-12 to 2019-12-14. Participants: rottis@fea.st, Denton Liu, Philip Oakley, Junio C Hamano. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/52438 ## rottis@fea.st, 2019-12-12 12:19 Subject: git checkout --autostash and git branch --autopop Message-ID: <8ab7d980-9584-4ce7-b4ee-9acac62c030c@www.fastmail.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/8ab7d980-9584-4ce7-b4ee-9acac62c030c%40www.fastmail.com ``` Hello, I'm not sure if this has been discussed in the past, but I would like to humbly request this feature. Let me explain: Similar to the 'git rebase --autostash', running 'git checkout --autostash' would automatically stash uncommitted changes for the current branch. then running 'git branch --autopop' would automatically apply an automatic stash when switching to a branch that had one. Thank you. ``` ## Denton Liu, 2019-12-12 18:09 Subject: Re: git checkout --autostash and git branch --autopop Message-ID: <20191212180901.GA35927@generichostname> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20191212180901.GA35927%40generichostname In-Reply-To: <8ab7d980-9584-4ce7-b4ee-9acac62c030c@www.fastmail.com> ``` Hi rottis, On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 02:19:50PM +0200, rottis@fea.st wrote: > Similar to the 'git rebase --autostash', running 'git checkout --autostash' would automatically stash uncommitted changes for the > current branch. then running 'git branch --autopop' would automatically apply an automatic stash when switching to a branch that had one. I currently have a WIP version of this feature but I haven't had enough time to polish it off (tests and docs). The last RFC round can be seen here[1] if you want to test it out. It seems to work well enough for personal use. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/cover.1571246693.git.liu.denton@gmail.com/ ``` ## Denton Liu, 2019-12-12 18:12 Subject: Re: git checkout --autostash and git branch --autopop Message-ID: <20191212181244.GA36165@generichostname> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20191212181244.GA36165%40generichostname In-Reply-To: <20191212180901.GA35927@generichostname> ``` On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 10:09:01AM -0800, Denton Liu wrote: > Hi rottis, > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 02:19:50PM +0200, rottis@fea.st wrote: > > Similar to the 'git rebase --autostash', running 'git checkout --autostash' would automatically stash uncommitted changes for the > > current branch. then running 'git branch --autopop' would automatically apply an automatic stash when switching to a branch that had one. > > I currently have a WIP version of this feature but I haven't had enough > time to polish it off (tests and docs). The last RFC round can be seen > here[1] if you want to test it out. It seems to work well enough for > personal use. Sorry, my mistake. I misread your message; my topic was for `git merge --autostash`. However, it does generalise the autostash machinery so perhaps it'll be simpler to implement it into checkout in the future, if that's desired? ``` ## Philip Oakley, 2019-12-12 22:02 Subject: Re: git checkout --autostash and git branch --autopop Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/e7850a51-4396-4698-ed98-62f991e33992%40iee.email In-Reply-To: <20191212180901.GA35927@generichostname> ``` On 12/12/2019 18:09, Denton Liu wrote: > Hi rottis, > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 02:19:50PM +0200, rottis@fea.st wrote: >> Similar to the 'git rebase --autostash', running 'git checkout --autostash' would automatically stash uncommitted changes for the >> current branch. then running 'git branch --autopop' would automatically apply an automatic stash when switching to a branch that had one. > I currently have a WIP version of this feature but I haven't had enough > time to polish it off (tests and docs). The last RFC round can be seen > here[1] if you want to test it out. It seems to work well enough for > personal use. > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/cover.1571246693.git.liu.denton@gmail.com/ Isn't this meant to be something similar to the --no-merge option for checkout. That is: I am where I am, but really I want this to be on branch X. Or is the --no-merge option meant to be something else? -- Philip ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2019-12-13 17:16 Subject: Re: git checkout --autostash and git branch --autopop Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/xmqq7e30m9i4.fsf%40gitster-ct.c.googlers.com In-Reply-To: ``` Philip Oakley writes: > Isn't this meant to be something similar to the --no-merge option for > checkout. That is: I am where I am, but really I want this to be on > branch X. Or is the --no-merge option meant to be something else? Is there a --no-merge option to "git checkout"? I know the reason why I invented "git checkout --merge" was because I wanted the command to carry more changes in the working tree than the default behaviour would while checking out another branch, but I do not think I added an option to do less, i.e. forbid it from carrying any change in the working tree while checking out another branch. ``` ## Philip Oakley, 2019-12-14 11:12 Subject: Re: git checkout --autostash and git branch --autopop Message-ID: <2e2c7d89-d820-0643-61f9-11e74ab4ab9f@iee.email> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/2e2c7d89-d820-0643-61f9-11e74ab4ab9f%40iee.email In-Reply-To: ``` On 13/12/2019 17:16, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Philip Oakley writes: > >> Isn't this meant to be something similar to the --no-merge option for >> checkout. That is: I am where I am, but really I want this to be on >> branch X. Or is the --no-merge option meant to be something else? > Is there a --no-merge option to "git checkout"? My mistake. I misremembered or misunderstood. I'd been looking at both checkout and branch man pages to see if there was a way out of the do the 'rewind current branch and create new branch at current state' dance. I thought I'd seen 'no-merge' as a 'checkout -b' style option. > I know the reason > why I invented "git checkout --merge" was because I wanted the > command to carry more changes in the working tree than the default > behaviour would while checking out another branch, but I do not > think I added an option to do less, i.e. forbid it from carrying any > change in the working tree while checking out another branch. For creating a new branch when in a dirty state (based on some other start point than HEAD), there should be an option for numpties that have already started digging the hole for themselves (stick's hand up apologetically)... I was hoping that @rottis would clarify if his request has the same symptoms. -- Philip ``` ## Philip Oakley, 2019-12-14 12:58 Subject: Re: git checkout --autostash and git branch --autopop Message-ID: <631f1c73-b85c-29f0-6259-5468dddcd0b8@iee.email> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/631f1c73-b85c-29f0-6259-5468dddcd0b8%40iee.email In-Reply-To: ``` Hi Eeli,  thanks for the clarification cc'ing the list. On 14/12/2019 11:58, Eeli wrote: > Often in my work I need to checkout my coworkers’ branches. When that happens, I will likely have some uncommitted changes I would need to commit or stash. > > This purely an ergonomic feature I’m suggesting. > > So instead of git stash or git commit -m ”wip” and later git stash pop or git reset HEAD~1, I could just run git checkout -b —autostash other-branch, do the work on the other branch and return to my previous state with git checkout —autopop my-branch. Also, c/would a detached head (rather than using -b) be part of the options if you are just doing a review? > > Apologies if I messed up my Git usage, I have used Git through Magit for too long. > >> On 14. Dec 2019, at 1.12 PM, Philip Oakley wrote: >> >> On 13/12/2019 17:16, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> Philip Oakley writes: >>> >>>> Isn't this meant to be something similar to the --no-merge option for >>>> checkout. That is: I am where I am, but really I want this to be on >>>> branch X. Or is the --no-merge option meant to be something else? >>> Is there a --no-merge option to "git checkout"? >> My mistake. I misremembered or misunderstood. I'd been looking at both >> checkout and branch man pages to see if there was a way out of the do >> the 'rewind current branch and create new branch at current state' >> dance. I thought I'd seen 'no-merge' as a 'checkout -b' style option. >> >>> I know the reason >>> why I invented "git checkout --merge" was because I wanted the >>> command to carry more changes in the working tree than the default >>> behaviour would while checking out another branch, but I do not >>> think I added an option to do less, i.e. forbid it from carrying any >>> change in the working tree while checking out another branch. >> For creating a new branch when in a dirty state (based on some other >> start point than HEAD), there should be an option for numpties that have >> already started digging the hole for themselves (stick's hand up >> apologetically)... >> >> I was hoping that @rottis would clarify if his request has the same >> symptoms. >> >> -- >> >> Philip ```