On Tue, Nov 12, 2024, at 23:58, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" <kristofferhaugsbakk@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> Maybe it’s possible but I kind of want to say “okay just pop your
>> stashes and make regular commits/branches”.
>
> That requires _more_ than recording the value of the ref for stash,
> as data for the Nth stash is recorded as the Nth reflog entry for
> that ref, and the reflog data is not what fetch/push/clone/bundle
> commands make available.
>
>> I’m not sure how to formulate that. Seems clumsy:
>>
>> refs are included in the bundle (also `refs/stash` but that
>> particular one won't be included in e.g. a clone):
>>
>> Would it be too drastic to use a footnote?
>
> I am not sure what you want to refer to with "that particular one",
> but the value of refs/stash does get recorded, and making a mirror
> clone out of the resulting bundle does give refs/stash with the
> value of the refs/stash in the original repository where the bundle
> was taken from. So refs/stash _does_ get included. What is not
> included is the reflog data for that ref (or any other ref, for that
> matter).
>
> Because the ref value is transferred via fetch/push/clone/bundle but
> the reflog (i.e. past values of a ref) data is *not*, "git stash
> show stash@{4}" is not something you can recreate in the copy of a
> repository, whether you create the copy with "clone" or "bundle +
> clone". The story is the same for other refs, and stash is not that
> special in this regard. "git show master@{yesterday}" in a freshly
> created copy would give something entirely different from what you
> would get in the original repository you mirror-cloned or took a
> bundle from.
>
> You'd need "cp -r" for that.
Thanks. I get it now.
I always forget that the stash uses the reflog.
