Re: `git stash pop` UX Problem

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Stefan Haller) writes:

> Your intention was clearly to drop the stash, it just wasn't dropped
> because of the conflict. Dropping it automatically once the conflict
> is resolved would be nice.

Your intention when you ran "git stash pop", yes. Your intention when
you ran "git add", I call that guessing.

The condition for dropping the stash should be more "conflits
resolutions are done AND the user is happy with it". Otherwise, if you
mess up your conflict resolution, and notice it after running "git add",
then you're screwed because Git just happily discarded your important
data. The point of keeping the stash is to leave it up to the user to
decide between "I'm happy, I can drop" or "I'm not, I should re-apply",
and Git cannot tell which is which.

Hinting the user to run "stash pop" would be more acceptable, but
talking about "git stash" in "git add"'s code is somehow a dependency
order violation (stash is normally implemented on top of Git's basic
features, not the other way around). Does not seem serious from at first
from the user point of view, but this pushes the codebase one step in
the direction of an unmaintainable mess.

-- 
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/
--
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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]