Re: Feature request: use relative path in worktree config files

[Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 1:36 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> I think there are some pros and some cons for relative path and absolute path.
>>> Maybe append a "--relative" option with `git worktree add` ?
>>>
>>> I've converted all path to relative and all work with success.
>>>
>>> What do you think to append this --relative option.
>>
>> Patches are welcome.
>
> Hmm, are they really welcome?
>
> Is an invocation of "git worktree add" really the right point in the
> workflow to decide if these references to other repositories should
> be relative or absolute?  When you are moving referrer, it is more
> convenient if the reference uses absolute path to name the
> referrent.  When you are moving both referrer and referrent, it is
> more convenient to use relative.

You're right (thanks for thinking this through). There's another case
that benefits from relative paths besides Stephane's use case: if you
put the entire repo and all associated worktrees on a portable disk,
the disk could be mounted on different paths each time, so absolute
paths do not fly.

> I somehow doubt that users know which future move they would be
> making when doing "git worktree add".
>
> To me, this almost looks like a need for a new subcommand to "git
> worktree" that lets you move existing worktree to elsewhere, or turn
> absolute reference to relative and vice versa.

An alternative is always use relative paths. You have to move
worktrees with "git worktree move". Which simplifies things a bit
(absolute -> relative conversion on existing worktrees could be done
at move time). But I'm not sure if it's a good idea to kill manual
move support. If you accidentally move a worktree, it'll be
disconnected and you have to fix that by yourself.
-- 
Duy