Re: What's cooking in git.git (topics)

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Mar 13, 2007, 19:48 UTC
Message-ID: <7vd53cj55n.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <20070313174304.GA2540@moooo.ath.cx>

Matthias Lederhofer <matled@gmx.net> writes:

Show 18 quoted lines

> Here is what I thought about:
>
> check that --work-dir overrides $GIT_WORK_DIR and both override
> $GIT_DIR/workdir.
>
> use a correct and an invalid path for:
>     $GIT_DIR/workdir:
>         file containing a relative and an absolute path
>         symlink pointing to an invalid path, a directory, a file
>         test a symlink to something else (e.g. device, fifo, ..) too?
>         directory
>     $GIT_WORK_DIR: relative and absolute path
>     and test what git does with git-rev-parse
>             --is-bare-repository
>             --show-prefix
>             --show-cdup
>
> test git rev-parse --is-inside-git-dir

... and do the rev-parse test with *and* *without* $GIT_WORK_DIR or $GIT_DIR/workdir to make sure there won't be any regressions.

Show 6 quoted lines

> A symlink pointing to an invalid path is currently handled as if there
> is no $GIT_DIR/workdir at all because stat returns ENOENT.  Is this ok
> or should git complain like it does for an invalid path when
> $GIT_DIR/workdir is a file?  We could also decide to ignore all
> invalid workdir settings and handle this the same as being outside the
> workdir.

Silently ignoring would leave the user who misconfigured it by mistake.

By the way, why should it be $GIT_DIR/workdir when it appears everybody is putting things in $GIT_DIR/config? Shouldn't it be something like:

	[core]
        	worktree = "/path/to/the/working/tree"

And more importantly, why nobody mentioned the above so far? Maybe it is a sign that nobody is interested in this new feature?