A long time ago there was a patch that made git-stash configurable: http://lists.zerezo.com/git/msg641406.html Junio's conclusion at the time was: "The decision here is that I am open to a change that implements the one-time safety instruction." http://lists.zerezo.com/git/msg641442.html Would this be something worth implementing after this release cycle? If so, would this be the basic logic?: If stash.quick is undefined: - Alert the user to what's going on - Ask them whether they'd like to enable the quick behavior, or exit (thus leaving stash.quick undefined). Valid values for stash.quick are then either undefined or 'save'. Is it still a good idea to implement the one-time safety instruction? I just thought I'd ask. Why? A co-worker ran into this funny situation last week: git branch git stash # oops, didn't mean that git stash help # prints usage, though only by luck git branch help # oops, didn't mean that There's a limit to guarding against the uneducated and by no means do I think the 2nd "oops"'s behavior should be changed. With the proposed change we would've warned him at the first "oops", and that's better than nothing. The above is a silly example despite the fact that it actually happened. 'rm help' happily removes your 'help' file. I just figured I'd mention it since maybe instead of printing usage stash should also warn: Error: unknown command 'help'. Run 'git help stash' for more information. Regarding the 'first time warning' thing: 97bc00a: Emit helpful status for accidental "git stash" save ..seems like it already addressed the issue by telling users how to apply the stash. That makes the case for the first-time-warning much less compelling. Hmm.. maybe I just answered my own question ;) The "unknown command 'help'" thing might be good nonetheless, though. -- David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html