4 ms·

So you're not using checkout, reset, and diff?

by Ace17 9y ago

e12e 9y ago
Or fetch?
- OJFord 9y ago
  I think a lot of people ignore fetch and only ever pull.
  - TomK32 9y ago
    But you'd have to stash before pull. At least with my config where a pull will rebase automatically.
    - OJFord 9y ago
      I use `git config pull.rebase true` too, but that doesn't mean you _have_ to stash first, just as rebase manually wouldn't - depends if there's a conflict. Same is true of merge-based pull.
    - e12e 9y ago
      Except for saving some typing, is there any benefit to stash over local branches? In other words, shouldn't git just fix ux for branches and rip out stash?
      - OJFord 8y ago
        So "some typing" would be: # git stash: prev_ref="$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD)" git checkout -b wip-stash git add . git commit -m 'wip stuff' git checkout "$prev_ref" # git stash pop: git checkout wip-stash -- . git checkout -D wip-stash It's quite a considerable saving. I suppose by "fix UX" you mean make it so the saving would be less anyway, but I think really they're just conceptually different: - branch: pointer to a line of history, i.e. a commit and inherently its ancestors - stash: a single commit-like dump of patches If stashing disappeared from git tomorrow, I think I'd use orphan commits rather than branches to replace it.
  - _pmf_ 9y ago
    pull == "just fuck my shit up"
  - e12e 9y ago
    I think it's the most important sources of my cognitive dissonance around git. It strengthens the illusion that a working directly is somehow related to a git store, which it really isn't. You have a working directly/checkout - that can be: identical (apart from ignored files) to some version in git; or different. If it's different ; some or all changes can be marked for storing in the git repo - most commonly as a new commit. It's a bit unfortunate that the repo typically is inside your work directory/checkout - under '.git' along with some files like hooks, that are not in the repo at all...
amerkhalid 9y ago
Good point, forgot about checkout, diff, clone, blame, add, rm, rebase, init, and probably a few more. Haven't used reset personally though but only when trying to fix someone's repo.

So you're not using checkout, reset, and diff?

by Ace17 9y ago

So you're not using checkout, reset, and diff?

e12e 9y ago

Or fetch?

OJFord 9y ago
I think a lot of people ignore fetch and only ever pull.
- TomK32 9y ago
  But you'd have to stash before pull. At least with my config where a pull will rebase automatically.
  - OJFord 9y ago
    I use `git config pull.rebase true` too, but that doesn't mean you _have_ to stash first, just as rebase manually wouldn't - depends if there's a conflict. Same is true of merge-based pull.
  - e12e 9y ago
    Except for saving some typing, is there any benefit to stash over local branches? In other words, shouldn't git just fix ux for branches and rip out stash?
    - OJFord 8y ago
      So "some typing" would be: # git stash: prev_ref="$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD)" git checkout -b wip-stash git add . git commit -m 'wip stuff' git checkout "$prev_ref" # git stash pop: git checkout wip-stash -- . git checkout -D wip-stash It's quite a considerable saving. I suppose by "fix UX" you mean make it so the saving would be less anyway, but I think really they're just conceptually different: - branch: pointer to a line of history, i.e. a commit and inherently its ancestors - stash: a single commit-like dump of patches If stashing disappeared from git tomorrow, I think I'd use orphan commits rather than branches to replace it.
- _pmf_ 9y ago
  pull == "just fuck my shit up"
- e12e 9y ago
  I think it's the most important sources of my cognitive dissonance around git. It strengthens the illusion that a working directly is somehow related to a git store, which it really isn't. You have a working directly/checkout - that can be: identical (apart from ignored files) to some version in git; or different. If it's different ; some or all changes can be marked for storing in the git repo - most commonly as a new commit. It's a bit unfortunate that the repo typically is inside your work directory/checkout - under '.git' along with some files like hooks, that are not in the repo at all...

amerkhalid 9y ago

Good point, forgot about checkout, diff, clone, blame, add, rm, rebase, init, and probably a few more. Haven't used reset personally though but only when trying to fix someone's repo.