Subject: Re: bug#20292: 24.5; Saving Git-controlled file with merge conflicts after "stash pop" stages the file

From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 21:55:44 +0300

> From: Stefan Monnier <[email-masked]>
> Cc: [email-masked],  [email-masked],  [email-masked]
> Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 14:13:50 -0400
> 
> > That's not the use case we were discussing, though.  We were
> > discussing a use case where the user merged from another repository,
> > and then wants her uncommitted changes restored.  Leaving them staged
> > will trip the naive users.
> 
> But Emacs is not the main culprit: Git itself will stage all the
> non-conflicting changes, so why should this not trip the user similarly?

The users I have in mind expect Emacs to save them from Git
idiosyncrasies.

> IOW if the user gets tripped by Emacs doing "git add" after resolving
> a unstash conflict, why would that same user not already be tripped
> identically by Git doing this "git add" on the non-conflicted files?

Because they don't use Git from the shell, or at least try not to.