On Monday 09 February 2009 19:54, Fabio Augusto Dal Castel wrote:
> Q. What are the differences between 'git stash' and 'git snapshot'?
>
> A.
>
> git stash git snapshot
>
> temporary/short-term permanent/long-term
> reflog-based branch-based
> applies a "git reset --hard" leaves working dir / index untouched
> does not stash untracked files snapshots ALL files (except ignored)
I like this snapshot idea, and I clearly see the difference
between this and stash.
For example, I use stash when I want to move away from the current
hacking because a new, more urgent change must be done somewhere
else.
Instead, I see a usecase for git snapshot for progressive
temporary snapshot while working towards a more complex feature
while needing temporary intermediate checkpoints: an effect
similar to what I currently achieve using git commit (a first
time) and git commit --amend as my work progresses.
In this respect, I wouldn't agree with the first difference you
remarked, but that's just the usecase I have in mind.
> Q. How it works?
>
> A.[What follows is a textual description of my current implementation.
> Of course, there is nothing carved in stone: suggestions and comments
> are MORE than welcome.]
>
> All snapshots are stored in a special branch ("<branch>_snapshots").
> So, if you are on 'master' branch, a 'git snapshot' will create/use a
> 'master_snapshots' branch.
I'm not sure I like the idea of creating these branches with these
branchnames. What about using another refs/ subtree? So
refs/snapshots/somebranchname would contain the snapshot paired
with refs/heads/somebranchname.
--
Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta
--
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
