I tend to 'git commit' and then 'git commit --amend' until I'm happy, then push to others.
I find it easier anyway. But the stash approach is interesting, thanks for sharing!
I find it easier anyway. But the stash approach is interesting, thanks for sharing!
In the authors example if he got it wrong and it replaced a load of non-links with links then running it again on the output of the first run isn't going to do any good. So he's suggesting replacing "git reset" with "git stash", both reset the repo to the way it was pre-sledgehammer but "git stash" also keeps around the previous results for comparison.
That'll teach me to 'scan read' and then comment!