Summary
gh stack view accepts no positional argument, but supplying one is silently discarded instead of rejected. The harmful case is passing a valid stack number that isn't the current one — you get a different stack's contents, with that stack's number in the header, and no indication your argument was ignored.
On a branch belonging to stack #6, asking for stack #3 (which exists):
$ gh stack view --short 3
Stack #6 <-- rendered #6, not the #3 that was requested
├ stack-b-two ○ #5
» stack-b-one ○ #4 (current)
└ main
$ gh stack view --short garbage999
Stack #6 <-- also silently succeeds
├ stack-b-two ○ #5
» stack-b-one ○ #4 (current)
└ main
Exit status is 0 in both cases.
Why this matters
The output carries a stack number in its header, so it reads as authoritative. Anyone comparing two stacks — or scripting against view — can act on the wrong one without any signal. It is also a natural mistake to make, because gh stack checkout does take a stack number, so the two commands look like they share a selector.
Reproduction
In a repo with two stacks:
git switch <a-branch-in-stack-B>
gh stack view --short <stack-A-number> # shows stack B
gh stack view --short garbage999 # shows stack B
Public repo with two stacks set up for this: https://github.com/xn/gh-stack-repro
Expected
Either error with unknown argument "3" (the usual gh behaviour for unexpected positionals), or accept a stack selector here the way gh stack checkout does. The latter would also give a non-interactive escape hatch for the ambiguity in #415.
Environment
gh 2.97.0
gh-stack v0.1.0
- git 2.50.1
- macOS 26.4.1, darwin/arm64
Summary
gh stack viewaccepts no positional argument, but supplying one is silently discarded instead of rejected. The harmful case is passing a valid stack number that isn't the current one — you get a different stack's contents, with that stack's number in the header, and no indication your argument was ignored.On a branch belonging to stack #6, asking for stack #3 (which exists):
Exit status is 0 in both cases.
Why this matters
The output carries a stack number in its header, so it reads as authoritative. Anyone comparing two stacks — or scripting against
view— can act on the wrong one without any signal. It is also a natural mistake to make, becausegh stack checkoutdoes take a stack number, so the two commands look like they share a selector.Reproduction
In a repo with two stacks:
Public repo with two stacks set up for this: https://github.com/xn/gh-stack-repro
Expected
Either error with
unknown argument "3"(the usualghbehaviour for unexpected positionals), or accept a stack selector here the waygh stack checkoutdoes. The latter would also give a non-interactive escape hatch for the ambiguity in #415.Environment
gh2.97.0gh-stackv0.1.0