From: Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com>
To: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>
Cc: "Elijah Newren" <newren@gmail.com>,
"Gábor Farkas" <gabor.farkas@gmail.com>,
"Git Mailing List" <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: git switch/restore, still experimental?
Date: Thu, 06 May 2021 17:29:39 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87o8doue98.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87mtt8uqec.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> (=?utf-8?B?IsOGdmFyIEFy?= =?utf-8?B?bmZqw7Zyw7A=?= Bjarmason"'s message of "Thu, 06 May 2021 12:05:23 +0200")
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, May 05 2021, Sergey Organov wrote:
>
>> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Tue, May 04 2021, Elijah Newren wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 3:36 AM Gábor Farkas <gabor.farkas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> the "git switch" and "git restore" commands were released two years
>>>>> ago, but the manpage still says "THIS COMMAND IS EXPERIMENTAL. THE
>>>>> BEHAVIOR MAY CHANGE.".
>>>>>
>>>>> i'd love to use them, but this warning gives me pause, perhaps i
>>>>> should wait until it stops being experimental, i worry that it might
>>>>> change in behavior unexpectedly and cause problems for me.
>>>>>
>>>>> considering that they were released two years ago, could the
>>>>> experimental-warning be removed now?
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks,
>>>>> gabor
>>>>
>>>> This probably makes sense. The author of switch and restore isn't
>>>> involved in the git project anymore. He decided to work on other
>>>> things, which was and is a big loss for us. I think others (myself
>>>> included) didn't know all the things that might have been in Duy's
>>>> head that he wanted to verify were working well before marking this as
>>>> good, but these two commands have generally been very well received
>>>> and it has been a few years. Personally, I'm not aware of anything
>>>> that we'd need or want to change with these commands.
>>>
>>> I am.
>>>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> And:
>>>
>>> # Moves a branch (or -M for --force)
>>> git branch -m old new
>>>
>>> That last one we can't have either because "switch" squats on "-m" for
>>> "--merge", which I daresay is a much more obscure use-case not deserving
>>> of a short option than "rename and switch to".
>>
>> Isn't --merge a different (and inferior) way to achieve what we already
>> have elsewhere with --autostash? Does it make sense to get rid of --merge
>> here in favor of --autostash?
>
> Probably, I haven't used the --merge option ever I think. Switching with
> dirty worktrees isn't really how I work.
>
> But to the extent that I've ever tried / run into errors with that I'd
> think that an option like --merge or --autostash is mostly a result of
> us being overzealous about "is_dirty() && die()" checks. E.g. rebase (at
> least a while ago, still) would refuse to rebase with a dirty tree, even
> though the path in question had nothing to do with paths that would be
> touched by the rebase.
Unfortunately, this will never solve the problem entirely. Global
autostash mode probably will, more chances if stash will save/restore
exact state of everything when applied to the original base.
>
> I suspect that much of the need for these sorts of options would go away
> with those checks being smarter, but it's separate from the "should we
> squat on -m" discussion...
It is not entirely separate. If --merge goes away, there will be no
"squat on -m" anymore.
Personally, I'd just turn on global autostash mode if it were available,
and forget about both --merge and --autostash, for the better.
Thanks,
-- Sergey Organov
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-06 14:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-04 10:32 git switch/restore, still experimental? Gábor Farkas
2021-05-04 19:54 ` Felipe Contreras
2021-05-05 3:46 ` Elijah Newren
2021-05-05 4:01 ` Eric Sunshine
2021-05-05 11:09 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-05-05 17:46 ` Felipe Contreras
2021-05-05 19:26 ` Sergey Organov
2021-05-05 19:48 ` Sergey Organov
2021-05-06 1:39 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-05-06 15:19 ` Sergey Organov
2021-05-06 10:05 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-05-06 14:29 ` Sergey Organov [this message]
2021-05-06 2:16 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-05-06 10:02 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-05-10 11:04 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-05-10 18:27 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-05-06 11:00 ` Felipe Contreras
2021-05-06 15:26 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-05-06 21:55 ` Felipe Contreras
2021-05-10 10:58 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-05-11 7:15 ` Felipe Contreras
2021-05-05 14:18 ` Johannes Schindelin
2021-05-05 14:26 ` Randall S. Becker
2021-05-06 1:15 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-05-05 17:52 ` Felipe Contreras
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87o8doue98.fsf@osv.gnss.ru \
--to=sorganov@gmail.com \
--cc=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=gabor.farkas@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=newren@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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 NNTP newsgroup(s).