i am confused. could you define an example case with some bash setting the files up in a way that the problem can be reproduced?

Hi, I am truly sorry. I only recently noticed that small box Options in the top right corner on tab 4 indicating which files I have selected for stashing. I just couldn't notice it :)) Therefore I thought there is no indication what is actually being stashed.

What I was hoping to see in the future is visual cue in form of filenames, that will be stashed. For example

The file1.txt is being tracked, the other two files are not. I would think the screen would show only file1.txt, since the options is set to not stash untracked files.

In this case no files are currently staged. And the options is set to not stash staged files (keep index). Therefore I would expect not to see any filenames.

So it's actually not a bug as I found out, but maybe a possible feature! :))

So currently, as I understand it, it seems that these options aren't used yet for a visual representation, but are used for a functional purpose. e.g., if you toggle untracked off (u), and write a stash (w), untracked files aren't added to the stash.

A couple ideas from me would be 1, we could add an identifier (?) to files that aren't tracked, and 2, we implement options for the the visual side (which looks straightforward as far as I can tell). I think it'd look something like this:

///
pub fn update(&mut self) -> Result<()> {
if self.is_visible() {
    let status_type = if self.options.keep_index { StatusType::Both } else { StatusType::WorkingDir };
    let show_untracked = if self.options.stash_untracked { Some(ShowUntrackedFilesConfig::All) } else { Some(ShowUntrackedFilesConfig::No) };
    self.git_status
    //TODO: support options
        .fetch(&StatusParams::new(status_type, show_untracked))?;
    }

    Ok(())
}

I've made a PR with that second change at the least (without the identifier idea).