Hi Phillip,

On Mon, 9 Jun 2025 at 11:42, Phillip Wood [off-list ref] wrote:

On 07/06/2025 13:56, Martin Ågren wrote:

quoted

On Sat, 7 Jun 2025 at 11:45, Phillip Wood [off-list ref] wrote:
[...]
So the implementation under test could bungle the pathspec, query the
user for both `file` and `otherfile` (in that order!), get EOF from
stdin while handling `otherfile`, leave it out of the stash, and end up
passing the test. We could try to protect against this by providing
another "y": if git wants to read something after our "s y n" sequence,
we'll give it a "y" in the hopes that it will trip things up. We do want
to test the handling of pathspecs here, so maybe tighten this?

Junio has merged this to next now. I was hoping that we would already
have coverage for this with other tests but I couldn't see anything so
I'll look at improving the coverage for "git stash push -p <pathspec>"
in the next release cycle.

Ok, makes sense. Those would certainly be good regression tests to have.
I did some manual testing when I wrote the above and feel confident,
FWIW, that it works correctly as of now.

Thanks for these git-stash improvements.

Martin