From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A2A41F4C0 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 02:33:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730038AbfJ1Cdj (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Oct 2019 22:33:39 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:54552 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728627AbfJ1Cdj (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Oct 2019 22:33:39 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB8902712C; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 22:33:36 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=2KROE/MTYUvYEFR4fZo8YXuCsWo=; b=BHcJAA rPuG3JdZ17JFFNqhilsW+6A5lNhAgVUW/a/S2iXOJJD3d2XOjgIk3kWNa5Wubimk Gov2XsIt8LnZlpQo0nI1yfZL5nWffQhx664RthBwSjC/EhTD2k5TB0sYULPJXn5u 7tWQsyCpQ3fQ+aqUopg5f05uICPzruwKQOHwE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=uDzG/QS0HT3ImxS8nxbSrOiAx3BHtm8v MJV/UrEb1EyzhUw7k+v4ouveNDVuW2Z9Hw23epy+jrMDEMDzf1Dhc0NWJURA86M5 xOST7R7QRm9t6cvACaUis3zLOGV1eQDZK4AnIl15k6/ounNZ9OT26Yh8rnStilmz TSMiD+HBXYc= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4B5F2712B; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 22:33:36 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 24C312712A; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 22:33:36 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix git stash with skip-worktree entries References: Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 11:33:35 +0900 In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Sun, 27 Oct 2019 22:05:30 +0100 (CET)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 57B14434-F92B-11E9-880D-C28CBED8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin writes: > Hi Junio, > > On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget wrote: > >> My colleague Dan Thompson reported a bug in a sparse checkout, where git >> stash (after resolving merge conflicts and then making up their mind to >> stash the changes instead of committing them) would "lose" files (and files >> that were not even in the sparse checkout's cone!). > > I only realized _now_ that this patch has not made it anywhere. Yeah, I do not recall seeing any of the patches in the topic (nor the cover letter). It is not clear to me what "lose" above means, which is an indication that I didn't read the topic a month ago X-<. Did it even get any review by skip worktree bit experts back then?