On Dec 19, 2007 4:42 AM, Jörg Sommer <joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I vote for stash print the list, because I dropped in the pitfall. I've dropped there myself, and work with a large team where we are both fans of stash, and scarred by it. Any newcomer to git that "discovers" stash gets hit by it a dozen times, this is completely unnecesary. All state-changing commands need parameters or are interactive (as it's the case with git-commit). That Johannes & early adopters, including me, have gotten used to the unintuitive (and dangerously surprising) behaviour of stash is no excuse to inflict it upon actual end users. It's way too early for git and the stash command to stick to a misfeature in the name of backwards compat. We'll adapt, as we have in the past, to an evolving ui. And if -- in a new repo -- the list is empty, we can just say so: Nothing has been stashed yet. Which looks completely different from a successful stash 'save' command. cheers, m - 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
