On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 11:07 PM Chris Torek <chris.torek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 9:19 PM Phil Hord <phil.hord@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I wonder if a fix could be as simple as recording the MERGE_HEAD as > > the third parent commit of the stash ref. > > There is already a third parent, but only when using -u / -a: this > third-parent commit holds the untracked files (which are then removed > a la `git clean`). > > A better trick would, I think, be able to save a partial merge state > in general, including the unmerged statuses of various files, the > ongoing action (merge or one of the other things that use it), and > so on, in a form that could be restored later. A plain `git stash` in > any partially-merged state should tell you: no, use the fancier > merge-state-saver instead. > > > I think being able to stash during a merge conflict could be very > > useful. I do sometimes need to get back to a working state > > momentarily and a merge conflict represents a long pole to doing so. > > Similarly, it could be useful to stash a conflicted `git rebase` so I > > could return to it later and pick up where I left off. Now we really > > would need to store some extra metadata, though, like the todo-list > > and ORIG_HEAD. And we would definitely need some extra command line > > switch to tell stash (or rebase) that I want to include all the rebase > > state and also "pause" the rebase by restoring to my starting point. > > This is the sort of thing I'm thinking of, for the "superstash" (terrible > name for it). Note that whatever this becomes, it should be send-able > (via push and/or email) so that you can have multiple people work > on resolving a particularly hairy merge. You can use git-imerge (https://github.com/mhagger/git-imerge) for that...just not once you've already started a merge (unless you're willing to undo and restart). As per my other email, I'm pretty worried about attempting to stash a merge, given that stash allows its contents to be "reapplied" on top of a different commit. That works fine for single-parent commits, but merges have multiple parents and it'd be rather tricky to reapply such a stash on a different base without creating an evil merge. Perhaps if "superstash" forced you to only reapply on the same base then it'd be fine...but it's starting to no longer be a "stash" anymore but something else.
