Re: git branch doesn't allow me to forcibly delete branch which was checked out in a now-deleted worktree dir

[Erik Johnson <palehose@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1475 bytes --]

On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 05:41:17PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:
>On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Erik Johnson <palehose@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm not expecting _any_ git branch command to prune worktrees, but a
>> branch _deletion_ shouldn't fail because git thinks the branch is
>> checked out in a worktree that doesn't exist anymore. Even in the
>> scenario where the worktree corresponding to that branch is on removable
>> media, does it really matter? You're trying to delete the branch.
>
>I disagree. git branch -d (should) fail to delete a branch when it is
>checked out in a worktree. If the worktree is a persistent (ie: not
>there due to removable media etc)  directory then it *definitely*
>shouldn't allow you to delete.
>
>It is possible we should update "git branch -d" should perform a
>worktree prune first, since that would enable it to determine that you
>deleted the directory, and any worktree which is removable should be
>marked as persistent.
>
>Given that there is a known workaround (git worktree prune) and that
>it is expected behavior for a branch checked out to prevent deletion,
>I think the best coarse of action would be to patch git branch -d to
>do a prune before attempting to delete.
>
>Thanks,
>Jake

Well, I never mentioned -d (I was using -D), but I think we're both in
agreement.

--

-Erik

"For me, it is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to
persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."  --Carl Sagan


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]