Re: Proposal for git stash rename
On 01/04/2013 10:40 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Micheil Smith writes: > >>> This patch implements a "git stash rename" using a new >>> "git reflog update" command that updates the message associated >>> with a reflog entry. >> ... >> I note that this proposal is now two years old. A work in progress patch was >> requested, however, after one was given this thread ended. I'm also finding >> a need for this feature; > > The whole point of reflog is that it is a mechanism to let users to > go safely back to the previous state, by using a file that is pretty > much append-only. It feels that a mechanism to "rewrite" one goes > completely against that principle, at least to me. The implementation of "git stash" itself seems to violate your principle, by storing its branches-that-are-not-branches within a mutable reflog. Just an observation... Michael -- Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Proposal for git stash rename
Micheil Smith writes: >> This patch implements a "git stash rename" using a new >> "git reflog update" command that updates the message associated >> with a reflog entry. > ... > I note that this proposal is now two years old. A work in progress patch was > requested, however, after one was given this thread ended. I'm also finding > a need for this feature; The whole point of reflog is that it is a mechanism to let users to go safely back to the previous state, by using a file that is pretty much append-only. It feels that a mechanism to "rewrite" one goes completely against that principle, at least to me. I have a feeling that "need" in "need for this feature" is a misspelt "want", that occasional misspelling of the stash message may give users awkward feelings when viewing "git stash list" output but not severe enough to make them unable to identify which stash entry holds which change, and that it is sufficient to pop and then restash if a user *really* cares. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Proposal for git stash rename
Greg Hewgill hewgill.com> writes: > > On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 10:54:43AM +, ??var Arnfj??r?? Bjarmason wrote: > > It's good to post a WIP PATCH even if it needs cleanup, just as a > > point for further discussion. > > Thanks, point taken. WIP patch follows. > > This patch implements a "git stash rename" using a new > "git reflog update" command that updates the message associated > with a reflog entry. > --- > [--snip--] Hi, I note that this proposal is now two years old. A work in progress patch was requested, however, after one was given this thread ended. I'm also finding a need for this feature; Not to try and bump an old thread, but what's the best way to land this? – Micheil Smith @miksago -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
