Hi,
On Wed, 2 Jul 2008, Nanako Shiraishi wrote:
> A stash records the state of the files in the working tree as a merge
> between the HEAD and another commit that records the state of the index,
> that in turn is a child commit of the HEAD commit. In order to later
> apply (or pop) the stash, however, only the tree objects of these three
> commits are necessary.
>
> This patch changes the structure of a stash to use a parentless new
> commit that has the same tree as the HEAD commit, in place of the HEAD
> commit. This way, a stash does not keep the history that leads to the
> HEAD commit reachable, even if the stash is kept forever.
May I register my suspicion that this is the wrong direction to go?
I actually find it quite nice that I can easily see in gitk where I
spawned off a certain stash, indeed, how the recent stash history
(manually specified with "stash@{0} stash@{1} stash@{2}" [*1*]), relates
to the current branch's history.
Ciao,
Dscho
P.S.: I vaguely remember that I once wrote a patch to turn "stash@{0..2}"
into exactly the same, but I do not remember why I did not follow up on
it. Was it refuted, or unwanted?
--
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
