* slight addition to t.gummerer's proposed "git stash" patch
@ 2017-10-11 9:04 Robert P. J. Day
2017-10-11 19:21 ` Thomas Gummerer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Robert P. J. Day @ 2017-10-11 9:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Git Mailing list
was perusing thomas gummerer's proposed "git stash" patch here:
https://www.spinics.net/lists/git/msg313993.html
and i'd make one more change -- i'd separate the OPTIONS entries for
"git stash push" and "git stash save" so they don't end up being
rendered all crushed together when displaying the man page:
OPTIONS
save [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked] [-a|--all] [-q|--quiet]
[<message>], push [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked] [-a|--all]
[-q|--quiet] [-m|--message <message>] [--] [<pathspec>...]
Save your local modifications to a new stash and roll them back to HEAD (in the working
tree and in the index). The <message> part is optional and gives the description along
with the stashed state.
... snip ...
so rather than:
OPTIONS
-------
push [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked]
[-a|--all] [-q|--quiet] [-m|--message <message>] [--]
[<pathspec>...]::
save [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked]
[-a|--all] [-q|--quiet] [<message>]::
Save your local modifications to a new 'stash entry' and roll them
back to HEAD (in the working tree and in the index).
The <message> part is optional and gives
the description along with the stashed state.
...
i'd suggest:
push [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked]
[-a|--all] [-q|--quiet] [-m|--message <message>] [--]
[<pathspec>...]::
Save your local modifications to a new 'stash entry' and roll them
back to HEAD (in the working tree and in the index).
The <message> part is optional and gives
the description along with the stashed state.
...
save [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked]
[-a|--all] [-q|--quiet] [<message>]::
This option is deprecated in favour of 'git stash push'.
or something like that.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: slight addition to t.gummerer's proposed "git stash" patch
2017-10-11 9:04 slight addition to t.gummerer's proposed "git stash" patch Robert P. J. Day
@ 2017-10-11 19:21 ` Thomas Gummerer
2017-10-11 19:24 ` Robert P. J. Day
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gummerer @ 2017-10-11 19:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert P. J. Day; +Cc: Git Mailing list
On 10/11, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> was perusing thomas gummerer's proposed "git stash" patch here:
>
> https://www.spinics.net/lists/git/msg313993.html
>
> and i'd make one more change -- i'd separate the OPTIONS entries for
> "git stash push" and "git stash save" so they don't end up being
> rendered all crushed together when displaying the man page:
I for one would like that. I sent a patch recently [1] that would
show git stash push first on the man page, which didn't seem to get
much traction. This goes a bit further than that, which I'd be happy
with.
[1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/20171005201029.4173-1-t.gummerer@gmail.com/
> OPTIONS
> save [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked] [-a|--all] [-q|--quiet]
> [<message>], push [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked] [-a|--all]
> [-q|--quiet] [-m|--message <message>] [--] [<pathspec>...]
> Save your local modifications to a new stash and roll them back to HEAD (in the working
> tree and in the index). The <message> part is optional and gives the description along
> with the stashed state.
> ... snip ...
>
> so rather than:
>
> OPTIONS
> -------
>
> push [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked]
> [-a|--all] [-q|--quiet] [-m|--message <message>] [--]
> [<pathspec>...]::
> save [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked]
> [-a|--all] [-q|--quiet] [<message>]::
>
> Save your local modifications to a new 'stash entry' and roll them
> back to HEAD (in the working tree and in the index).
> The <message> part is optional and gives
> the description along with the stashed state.
> ...
>
> i'd suggest:
>
> push [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked]
> [-a|--all] [-q|--quiet] [-m|--message <message>] [--]
> [<pathspec>...]::
>
> Save your local modifications to a new 'stash entry' and roll them
> back to HEAD (in the working tree and in the index).
> The <message> part is optional and gives
> the description along with the stashed state.
> ...
>
> save [-p|--patch] [-k|--[no-]keep-index] [-u|--include-untracked]
> [-a|--all] [-q|--quiet] [<message>]::
>
> This option is deprecated in favour of 'git stash push'.
This sounds good to me. This can probably be done at the same time
(or after) something like my patch [2], which removes the mentions of
'git stash save' from the man pages, and replaces them with 'git stash
push'. I guess it would be a bit confusing to see a deprecated
command in the man pages, especially since there is a good (almost
drop-in) replacement :)
[2]: https://public-inbox.org/git/20171005200049.GF30301@hank/#t
> or something like that.
>
> rday
>
> --
>
> ========================================================================
> Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
> http://crashcourse.ca
>
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
> LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
> ========================================================================
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: slight addition to t.gummerer's proposed "git stash" patch
2017-10-11 19:21 ` Thomas Gummerer
@ 2017-10-11 19:24 ` Robert P. J. Day
2017-10-16 18:34 ` Thomas Gummerer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Robert P. J. Day @ 2017-10-11 19:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gummerer; +Cc: Git Mailing list
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017, Thomas Gummerer wrote:
> On 10/11, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> >
> > was perusing thomas gummerer's proposed "git stash" patch here:
> >
> > https://www.spinics.net/lists/git/msg313993.html
> >
> > and i'd make one more change -- i'd separate the OPTIONS entries for
> > "git stash push" and "git stash save" so they don't end up being
> > rendered all crushed together when displaying the man page:
>
> I for one would like that. I sent a patch recently [1] that would
> show git stash push first on the man page, which didn't seem to get
> much traction. This goes a bit further than that, which I'd be happy
> with.
>
> [1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/20171005201029.4173-1-t.gummerer@gmail.com/
... snip ...
if you want, just crush my suggestion into your earlier patch and
resubmit it.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: slight addition to t.gummerer's proposed "git stash" patch
2017-10-11 19:24 ` Robert P. J. Day
@ 2017-10-16 18:34 ` Thomas Gummerer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gummerer @ 2017-10-16 18:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert P. J. Day; +Cc: Git Mailing list
On 10/11, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2017, Thomas Gummerer wrote:
>
> > On 10/11, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > >
> > > was perusing thomas gummerer's proposed "git stash" patch here:
> > >
> > > https://www.spinics.net/lists/git/msg313993.html
> > >
> > > and i'd make one more change -- i'd separate the OPTIONS entries for
> > > "git stash push" and "git stash save" so they don't end up being
> > > rendered all crushed together when displaying the man page:
> >
> > I for one would like that. I sent a patch recently [1] that would
> > show git stash push first on the man page, which didn't seem to get
> > much traction. This goes a bit further than that, which I'd be happy
> > with.
> >
> > [1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/20171005201029.4173-1-t.gummerer@gmail.com/
>
> ... snip ...
>
> if you want, just crush my suggestion into your earlier patch and
> resubmit it.
Thanks, before doing that let me see where that discussion goes. My
plan was to be a bit more careful and first get rid of mentions of
'git stash save', and mark it deprecated as a next step. In which
case I'd submit a patch with your suggestions in a few cycles.
> rday
>
> --
>
> ========================================================================
> Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
> http://crashcourse.ca
>
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
> LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
> ========================================================================
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-10-16 18:33 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-10-11 9:04 slight addition to t.gummerer's proposed "git stash" patch Robert P. J. Day
2017-10-11 19:21 ` Thomas Gummerer
2017-10-11 19:24 ` Robert P. J. Day
2017-10-16 18:34 ` Thomas Gummerer
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).