On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 11:26:52AM +0100, Markus Elfring wrote: > > > For better or worse, There Is More Than One Way To Do It in Git. ;-) > > > > Do you see also a need for improvements in the cooperation between the > functions "checkout" and "stash"? > Would it be useful to combine them into a single command on demand to > make the switching of branches without committing > changes a bit more convenient? I personally prefer to tell Git explicitly what to do when I'm checkouting a different branch, and have a habit of checking what kind of uncommitted changes I have all the time (and I think it's a good habit ;-), so I have no problem with explicitly stashing before checkouting different branch if I need to. The thing is, I use multiple branches less than I should. If I used them more, I'd probably be simply using stash much less than making temporary commits and possibly cleaning them up later instead. (But if you get really used to sensibly separating commits, you end up actually adjusting your programming process subconsciously in a way to lend to the appropriate commit sequence naturally.) -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. -- Dunbal (464142) -- 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