From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>,
Mark Levedahl <mlevedahl@gmail.com>,
Mikael Magnusson <mikachu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 23/23] checkout: retire --ignore-other-worktrees in favor of --force
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2015 12:40:32 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqlhetyszz.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1436203860-846-24-git-send-email-sunshine@sunshineco.com> (Eric Sunshine's message of "Mon, 6 Jul 2015 13:31:00 -0400")
Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes:
> As a safeguard, checking out a branch already checked out by a different
> worktree is disallowed. This behavior can be overridden with
> --ignore-other-worktrees, however, this option is neither obvious nor
> particularly discoverable. As a common safeguard override, --force is
> more likely to come to mind. Therefore, overload it to also suppress the
> check for a branch already checked out elsewhere.
I hate to be asking this again but why is it a good idea to allow
'ignore-other-worktrees' in the first place (let alone making it
more discoverable)? You'll have multiple working trees, either
using the new "git worktree" or using the old contrib/workdir, for
one of the two reasons:
* You need a separate work area to build a new history.
* You need a separate work area to expand the contents of a
specific commit.
Here "create binary by running make" falls into the latter category;
as far as Git is concerned, you are only looking at, not extending
the history of any specific branch.
If you are extending the history of some branch, then you would want
to be on that branch. Why would you want to have another worktree
that will get into a confusing state once you create that commit on
the checked out branch in this newly created worktree?
Wasn't the whole point of making the primary repository aware of the
secondary worktrees via the "linked checkout" mechanism because that
confusion was the biggest sore point of the old contrib/workdir
implementation?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-06 19:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-06 17:30 [PATCH v3 00/23] replace "checkout --to" with "worktree add" Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 01/23] Documentation/git-checkout: fix incorrect worktree prune command Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 02/23] Documentation/git-worktree: associate options with commands Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 03/23] Documentation: move linked worktree description from checkout to worktree Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 04/23] Documentation/git-worktree: add BUGS section Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 05/23] Documentation/git-worktree: split technical info from general description Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 06/23] Documentation/git-worktree: add high-level 'lock' overview Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 07/23] Documentation/git-worktree: add EXAMPLES section Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 08/23] checkout: fix bug with --to and relative HEAD Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 09/23] checkout: relocate --to's "no branch specified" check Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 10/23] checkout: prepare_linked_checkout: drop now-unused 'new' argument Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 11/23] checkout: make --to unconditionally verbose Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 12/23] checkout: drop 'checkout_opts' dependency from prepare_linked_checkout Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 13/23] worktree: introduce "add" command Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 14/23] worktree: add --force option Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 15/23] worktree: add --detach option Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 16/23] worktree: add -b/-B options Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 17/23] tests: worktree: retrofit "checkout --to" tests for "worktree add" Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 18/23] checkout: retire --to option Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 19:41 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-07-07 7:08 ` Eric Sunshine
2015-07-08 16:58 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 19/23] checkout: require worktree unconditionally Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 20/23] worktree: extract basename computation to new function Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 21/23] worktree: add: make -b/-B default to HEAD when <branch> is omitted Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 17:30 ` [PATCH v3 22/23] worktree: add: auto-vivify new branch " Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 19:19 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-07-07 1:33 ` Eric Sunshine
2015-07-07 16:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-07-06 17:31 ` [PATCH v3 23/23] checkout: retire --ignore-other-worktrees in favor of --force Eric Sunshine
2015-07-06 19:40 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2015-07-07 8:24 ` Eric Sunshine
2015-07-07 9:41 ` Eric Sunshine
2015-07-07 16:20 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-07-07 23:10 ` Eric Sunshine
2015-07-08 0:43 ` Mark Levedahl
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqlhetyszz.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mikachu@gmail.com \
--cc=mlevedahl@gmail.com \
--cc=pclouds@gmail.com \
--cc=sunshine@sunshineco.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.