On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 07:30:28PM +0000, Thomas Gummerer wrote: > Thanks all who chimed in here. My new description is definitely not > right. The reason I wanted to change it is part because it's an > implementation detail, and part because it's going to be not quite > right when the filename argument is introduced. > > How about the following: > > Save your local modifications to a new 'stash' and roll them back > both in the working tree and in the index. > > As an added bonus this also matches what git stash save -p does.
IMHO that is both informative and accurate. You could add: (unless --keep-index was used) at the end of the sentence, though I am not sure it is necessary. -Peff
