Uwe Kleine-König <uwe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > I'd say that's not a feature, is it? I think that is a sign that "add -N" came much later than "stash", and whoever added the former was not a heavy user of "stash" ;-) As the state of the "tracked files in the working tree" and "staged contents in the index" are both stored as tree objects, I think the necessary fix would involve - record the contents of the "intent-to-add" paths to the tree object for the working tree. - record the fact that the "intent-to-add" paths are "not in the index yet" by removing them from the tree object for the index. on the recording side (i.e. "stash create"), and then teach the replay side (i.e. "stash apply") to pay attention to such strange "exists in the tree for the working tree, but missing from the tree for the index" paths and mark them with the "intent-to-add" bit.
