[PATCH] Ignore dirty submodule states during stash

Do not save states of submodules as stash should ignore it. Signed-off-by: Vasily Titskiy --- git-stash.sh | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/git-stash.sh b/git-stash.sh index c7c65e2..b500c44 100755 --- a/git-stash.sh +++ b/git-stash.sh @@ -116,7 +116,7

Re: [PATCH] Ignore dirty submodule states during stash

Hi Stefan, On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 11:37:20PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Vasily Titskiy wrote: > > Do not save states of submodules as stash should ignore it. > > Can you explain why this is a good idea? > (It is not obvious to me eit

Re: [PATCH] Ignore dirty submodule states during stash

Hi Stefan, > > So, this is the issue. Instead of getting my local changes, I got a > > conflict (and stash is not > > poped out). The root cause is the 'stash' command does not know how to deal > > with submodules, > > but currently it tries to save the state of submodules, and even tries to >

[PATCH v1 0/2] Ignore dirty submodule states during stash

Impoved description + added test git-stash.sh | 2 +- t/t3903-stash.sh | 35 +++ 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More major

Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] Ignore dirty submodule states during stash

As stash does not know how to deal with submodules, it should not try to save/restore their states as it leads to redundant merge conflicts. Signed-off-by: Vasily Titskiy --- git-stash.sh | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/git-stash.sh b/git-stash.sh index

Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] Ignore dirty submodule states during stash

It checks if 'stash pop' does not trigger merge conflics in submodules. --- t/t3903-stash.sh | 35 +++ 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/t3903-stash.sh b/t/t3903-stash.sh index 2142c1f..e48a5b5 100755 --- a/t/t3903-stash.sh +++ b/t/t3903-stash.sh @@ -

[PATCH v2] Ignore dirty submodule states during stash

As stash does not know how to deal with submodules, it should not try to save/restore their states as it leads to redundant merge conflicts. Added test checks if 'stash pop' does not trigger merge conflics in submodules. Signed-off-by: Vasily Titskiy --- git-stash.sh | 2 +

Re: [PATCH v2] Ignore dirty submodule states during stash

Hi Junio, You're right, it's redundant here. Should I resubmit the path without this line? -- Regards, Vasily Titskiy On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Vasily Titskiy writes: > > > diff --git a/t/t3903-stash.sh b/t/t3903-stash.sh > >

Re: [PATCH v2] Ignore dirty submodule states during stash

The command does nothing, so it's not needed. There is also a typo in my patch description, so I'll resend it again with needed changes. -- Regards, Vasily Titskiy On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Vasily Titskiy writes: > >> You're right,

[PATCH v3] Ignore dirty submodule states during stash

As stash does not know how to deal with submodules, it should not try to save/restore their states as it leads to redundant merge conflicts. Added test checks if 'stash pop' does not trigger merge conflicts in submodules. Signed-off-by: Vasily Titskiy --- git-stash.sh | 2 +