> Le 18 août 2025 à 11:14, Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit : > > On 17/08/2025 17:08, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> To use it create your stash with "git stash push --keep-index" and then >>> use the script to pop the unstaged changes rather than using "git stash >>> pop". If the script proves to be useful then perhaps we could add an >>> "--unstaged" option to "git stash pop" >> Hmph, would the behaviour useful enough that it should be always >> enabled, without any new option? I strongly suspect that those who >> worked on adding "--keep-index" option did not expect the user to be >> mucking with the working tree files while "testing the staged stuff >> by updating the working tree files to match it and nothing else", >> and as long as the end-user stays within that originally designed >> use case, nothing changes for them, no? I can’t particularly comment on the script, but I do think the example in the docs should either just work or be adjusted to work. > Yes it probably would make sense if we knew that the stash had been created with "--keep-index". At the moment I don't think there is anywhere to tell from looking at the stash if that's the case but we could add a trailer to the commit message when we create the stash to record that it was created with "--keep-index" and apply only the unstaged changes when we see that trailer. > > Thanks > > Phillip This seems reasonable; I wonder if there would be any interaction with the stash import/export features? But perhaps those omitted the index anyway, I cannot recall.
