splitting the discussion about the 2 patches ...

On 12/13/2012 08:29 PM, Assaf Gordon wrote:
> The first mentions 'git stash' in a relevant paragraph.
> [...]

Thanks.

> [PATCH 1/2] doc: mention "git stash" in HACKING

I tweaked the commit message a bit: even if the change is trivial
and the subject is HACKING, it's good practice to mention it in a
line below which describes the change in detail.

And I fixed a typo, here's the diff.

-    Run "git stash" to temporarily hide uncommited changes in your
+    Run "git stash" to temporarily hide uncommitted changes in your

Below is the full patch (not pushed yet).

Have a nice day,
Berny

>From 53f1ad2f93435cc59adc58009a035b37f0127c16 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Assaf Gordon <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 08:47:17 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] doc: mention "git stash" in HACKING

* HACKING: In the paragraph about switching branches, mention
"git stash" as a way to continue while preserving uncommitted
changes.
---
 HACKING |    2 ++
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/HACKING b/HACKING
index f3f961a..adc305f 100644
--- a/HACKING
+++ b/HACKING
@@ -120,6 +120,8 @@ Note 2:
     sometimes the checkout will fail, telling you that your local
     modifications conflict with changes required to switch branches.
     However, in any case, you will *not* lose your uncommitted changes.
+    Run "git stash" to temporarily hide uncommitted changes in your
+    local directory, restoring a clean working directory.

 Anyhow, get back onto your just-created branch:

-- 
1.7.7


Reply via email to