Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] reset: add option "--merge-safe" to "git reset"

[Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 3:05 PM, Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net> wrote:
> Christian Couder schrieb:
>> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net> wrote:
>>> Junio C Hamano schrieb:
>>>> Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net> writes:
>>>  $ git stash
>>>  $ git reset --hard $target
>>>  $ git stash pop
>>>
>>>> I have _no_ idea what the intended use-case of --merge-safe is, and that
>>>> was why I asked Christian for clarification in the previous round.  The
>>>> answer was still not clear enough so I pointed out --merge-safe could be
>>>> still doing a wrong thing even in _his_ use-case.
>>> Reading Christian in 200909170554.49416.chriscool@tuxfamily.org, I think
>>> this *is* his use-case? Christian?
>>
>> Yes, I agree, it can be used instead of git stash.
>
> It "can"? Do you say that you intend --merge-safe for something else in
> addition to the above stash + reset --hard + stash pop sequence? What?

As I said to Junio, another "use case" is to enable more commands (like
an improved cherry-pick) to be used with a dirty work tree or index.

>> By the way Linus, in his
>> patch that added the --merge option, said that --merge could be used like
>> that.
>
> But that use-case has one important difference: You can't use stash right
> before the reset:
>
>   # work tree is dirty
>   $ git pull $there $topic  # assume we have conflicts
>
>   # investigate result ...
>   # oh no, that's crap, scratch it
>
>   $ git stash what? conflicted changes?
>   $ git reset what? --hard would remove my dirty state, too
>
> You are screwed. 'git reset --merge' comes to rescue.
>
> I'm pretty sure you don't mean --merge-safe to provide extra safety in
> *this* use-case,

You are right, I don't think it is usefull in this use case.

> but that you have a very different use-case in mind.

I don't have other use cases I didn't already talked about in mind.

Best regards,
Christian.