4 ms·

Git tricks: stash

• PuercoPop 14y ago
  If you want to make a quick fix it in an unrelated function or the same file would be easier to do git add -p <file>. It allows to decide which change to stage.
  • srl 14y ago
    Yup. It's often hard to test that change if the rest of the working copy is borked, though.
    • sofal 14y ago
      "git stash --keep-index" to stash everything except for what is in the index, or "git stash -p" to choose what changes to stash.
    • deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
• loganfsmyth 14y ago
  I definitely agree that stash is useful, but I'm more of a fan of committing early and often, then squashing using git rebase -i.
• woadwarrior01 14y ago
  I used to use stash before discovering Kenneth Reitz's legit ( http://www.git-legit.org/ http://www.git-legit.org/ ). With legit, git switch <branchname> automatically stashes and restores uncommitted changes before and after switching branches. One less command to type and sightly higher level.
• ernestipark 14y ago
  I find stash to be most useful when you want to pull in changes but have a dirty directory.
• Myrmornis 14y ago
  > Sometimes, something needs fixing ASAP, and you have 260 build-breaking lines an hour away from being commit-worthy If you have 260 lines of code you should have committed it already. I disagree with the article. stash is the wrong solution for a substantial set of changes tied to a particular branch -- instead you should use a temporary branch, and relax about using git reset to rework it later. > clone a new copy of the repository The thought shouldn't even be entering your mind.