Junio C Hamano wrote: > Brandon Casey <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >>> Also we may want to introduce a stash per branch if we do this. >> This isn't necessary for how I use stash. > > That's what I thought initially. But after thinking about it a > bit, I do not think so anymore. > > It feels limiting not to be able to stash here and unstash > there. You cannot stash on one branch and apply on another as > easily (you should still be able to, by naming the stash > explicitly, if you really wanted to). > > But why would one even want to? "What I've been hacking on is > getting into a good shape but now I noticed I was on a wrong > branch", is probably the only reason. But that is what branch > switching "git checkout" (and its -m variant) does. If your > changes are something that would make "checkout -m" conflict, > stashing and unstashing will result in the same conflict anyway, > so nothing is lost. Ok, I had to read that more than once, but you've convinced me. per-branch stash is interesting. -brandon - 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
