Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes:
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> ...
> Isn't this overkill? I mean, we could just change git-stash to output a
> warning:
>
> Note: your changes have been stored temporarily. If you need to
> keep them permanently, consider putting them into a branch:
>
> git branch stashed-longer stash
You are asking the question to a Wrong Person, as I never asked to have a
nonexpirable stash, but I would hate such a change to waste four lines
of my terminal every time I create a new stash.
Also making a "branch" in the "git branch" sense (iow, a local branch you
can build on top of) is not something you would want anyway, isn't it?
What is the workflow to resume working from there?
$ git checkout stashed-longer
$ git reset --soft HEAD^
$ work more
$ git commit
and losing the tip with "reset --soft" would be crucial. Otherwise if you
make commits on top of it by mistake, you will have a funny merge in the
history behind that commit. IOW
$ git checkout stashed-longer
$ work more
$ git commit --amend
would not work.
Of course,
$ git stash apply stashed-longer
would work but that is by accident, as at that point what you are feeding
"git stash" command is not really a name of a ref that is a stash.
--
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
