4 ms·

I don't believe I've ever pushed a WIP commit. Count that to the benefits of stashing I guess. I don't consider any of this a problem, but why don't you tell m

I don't believe I've ever pushed a WIP commit. Count that to the benefits of stashing I guess. I don't consider any of this a problem, but why don't you tell me how your preferred tool does it.

stouset 2y ago
So when I say there a problems with stashing, you suggest wip commits. When I point out problems with wip commits, we go back to stashing? jj needs neither because everything in your working copy is already part of a commit. You can’t accidentally push unfinished changes because jj will complain if it hasn’t been described (given a commit message). If you need to move changes between commits you don’t need to stash because you can easily move the contents of a commit around.
- edflsafoiewq 2y ago
  Stashing vs WIP commits have pros and cons. I've never hit any of these problems you're pointing out, so I don't have any particular strong opinion about which one you should use. I can see that being nice I guess. If jj's stashes are just regular commits, don't you have the problem where you accidentally push a stash just like you push a WIP commit?
  - stouset 2y ago
    It’s not like these are git’s only pain points. Git is practically the poster child for software that’s difficult and confusing to use.
    - edflsafoiewq 2y ago
      I don't think so. Like the OP, my everyday git usage is pretty straightforward. So "maybe this thing you do every once in a while could be a little nicer" doesn't feel very compelling.
  - steveklabnik 2y ago
    > don't you have the problem where you accidentally push a stash just like you push a WIP commit? Because jj doesn’t require commits to be on a branch, and the equivalent feature (bookmarks) don’t automatically advance, if you created a new commit to stash some stuff, the name wouldn’t move to it, and so when you push nothing would happen.

4 ms·

I don't believe I've ever pushed a WIP commit. Count that to the benefits of stashing I guess. I don't consider any of this a problem, but why don't you tell m

by edflsafoiewq 2y ago

I don't believe I've ever pushed a WIP commit. Count that to the benefits of stashing I guess. I don't consider any of this a problem, but why don't you tell me how your preferred tool does it.

stouset 2y ago
So when I say there a problems with stashing, you suggest wip commits. When I point out problems with wip commits, we go back to stashing? jj needs neither because everything in your working copy is already part of a commit. You can’t accidentally push unfinished changes because jj will complain if it hasn’t been described (given a commit message). If you need to move changes between commits you don’t need to stash because you can easily move the contents of a commit around.
- edflsafoiewq 2y ago
  Stashing vs WIP commits have pros and cons. I've never hit any of these problems you're pointing out, so I don't have any particular strong opinion about which one you should use. I can see that being nice I guess. If jj's stashes are just regular commits, don't you have the problem where you accidentally push a stash just like you push a WIP commit?
  - stouset 2y ago
    It’s not like these are git’s only pain points. Git is practically the poster child for software that’s difficult and confusing to use.
    - edflsafoiewq 2y ago
      I don't think so. Like the OP, my everyday git usage is pretty straightforward. So "maybe this thing you do every once in a while could be a little nicer" doesn't feel very compelling.
  - steveklabnik 2y ago
    > don't you have the problem where you accidentally push a stash just like you push a WIP commit? Because jj doesn’t require commits to be on a branch, and the equivalent feature (bookmarks) don’t automatically advance, if you created a new commit to stash some stuff, the name wouldn’t move to it, and so when you push nothing would happen.