3 ms·

no git stash ?

by ilyt 4y ago

no git stash ?

forgotpwd16 4y ago
The `git stash` is useful but that by default status doesn't show anything related to stashed changes makes it easy to forget you have them. Can replace stash workflow with commit, branch, etc and have one less thing to think about.
- ilyt 4y ago
  I mean I can configure my shell correctly so that isn't a problem in the first place -> ᛯ date >> asd [23:57:10] ^ [/tmp/a] {master *} -> ᛯ git stash Saved working directory and index state WIP on master: bf5a0f8 fix [23:57:13] ^ [/tmp/a] {master $} -> ᛯ git pop On branch master Changes not staged for commit: (use "git add <file>..." to update what will be committed) (use "git restore <file>..." to discard changes in working directory) modified: asd no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a") Dropped refs/stash@{0} (4f46bc00a3d6032c2726f04540a44656090e05ca) [23:57:16] ^ [/tmp/a] {master *} -> ᛯ it's pretty non-missable (git pop is just alias to stash pop)
RichardCA 4y ago
If your work-in-progress files are trivial, it's easy to create a temp directory with a .gitignore with just a '*' in it and leave your files there. If it's not so trivial, create a local temp branch so you can cherry-pick it or merge it back in later, or maybe convert your temp branch into a more enduring one. Stashes are pseudo-commits with no branch context, and are more of a conceptual burden then they're worth.
- ilyt 4y ago
  or just type git stash do whatever you need git stash pop done > Stashes are pseudo-commits with no branch context, and are more of a conceptual burden then they're worth. They are literally just commits like everything else. They just land in refs/stash, where branches/tags live. Man the shit people say about how git works while not knowing how git works... It's essentially a temporary branch with some syntactic sugar to manage You can even just convert it to normal branch git branch cake stash@{0}
  - RichardCA 4y ago
    Dude, have you ever tried the .gitignore trick? It really does come in handy. And your overall tone was uncalled-for. Cheers.

no git stash ?

by ilyt 4y ago

no git stash ?

The `git stash` is useful but that by default status doesn't show anything related to stashed changes makes it easy to forget you have them. Can replace stash workflow with commit, branch, etc and have one less thing to think about.

ilyt 4y ago
I mean I can configure my shell correctly so that isn't a problem in the first place -> ᛯ date >> asd [23:57:10] ^ [/tmp/a] {master *} -> ᛯ git stash Saved working directory and index state WIP on master: bf5a0f8 fix [23:57:13] ^ [/tmp/a] {master $} -> ᛯ git pop On branch master Changes not staged for commit: (use "git add <file>..." to update what will be committed) (use "git restore <file>..." to discard changes in working directory) modified: asd no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a") Dropped refs/stash@{0} (4f46bc00a3d6032c2726f04540a44656090e05ca) [23:57:16] ^ [/tmp/a] {master *} -> ᛯ it's pretty non-missable (git pop is just alias to stash pop)

RichardCA 4y ago

If your work-in-progress files are trivial, it's easy to create a temp directory with a .gitignore with just a '*' in it and leave your files there. If it's not so trivial, create a local temp branch so you can cherry-pick it or merge it back in later, or maybe convert your temp branch into a more enduring one. Stashes are pseudo-commits with no branch context, and are more of a conceptual burden then they're worth.

ilyt 4y ago
or just type git stash do whatever you need git stash pop done > Stashes are pseudo-commits with no branch context, and are more of a conceptual burden then they're worth. They are literally just commits like everything else. They just land in refs/stash, where branches/tags live. Man the shit people say about how git works while not knowing how git works... It's essentially a temporary branch with some syntactic sugar to manage You can even just convert it to normal branch git branch cake stash@{0}
- RichardCA 4y ago
  Dude, have you ever tried the .gitignore trick? It really does come in handy. And your overall tone was uncalled-for. Cheers.