On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 5:38 AM, Reimer Behrends <behre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> First, the safer (and arguably overall better) approach is to recognize > that stash/shelve operations are the inverse of the staging area for this > purpose. I.e., rather than stage a partial commit, you stash everything but > the partial commit, then commit whatever changes remain in toto. This does > not require the staging area and ensures that, e.g., you're not committing > something that doesn't even compile (which breaks bisect, CI tools, etc.). > This is exactly my viewpoint. A work a lot in Subversion and I often miss a stash, never a staging area. I have used git's staging area as intended occasionally but mostly I find it annoying. I feel slighty dirty when I do a partial commit since I know it is, in theory at least, untested. A stash with abilites like "git add --interactive" to stash parts within a file is the way to go IMO. /Peter
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
