Re: [PATCH 2/2] worktree: provide better prefix to go back to original cwd

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Oct 7, 2010, 14:56 UTC
Message-ID: <7vvd5evyo6.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim8R2ZxJ1_KnxxRwTjf2mz=NtgQ9MyV_7iAqEpG@mail.gmail.com>

Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:

Show 17 quoted lines

> On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> pclouds@gmail.com writes:
>> ...
>> If the original cwd is inside GIT_WORK_TREE, limiting ourselves inside
>> prefix naturally limits the operation to the subdirectory we started from
>> (if the original cwd is at GIT_WORK_TREE, that would make it a whole-tree
>> operation).  A natural extension of this idea to limit the operation to
>> the part of the subtree of the working tree we started from is to refuse
>> to work in the case where the original cwd is outside GIT_WORK_TREE (the
>> current implementation of GIT_WORK_TREE may or may not correctly implement
>> it, though---I never use it myself).
>
> I tend to think that as we go up to worktree's root, prefix is shorten
> and the operation area is widen. When cwd is at worktree's, we operate
> on full worktree. If it goes up one level higher, the operation area
> remains full worktree (but not everything under cwd because cwd now
> can have non-worktree directories).

I have a feeling that you did not understand my /srv/git/git.git (no, it is not a bare repository) vs /var/tmp example.

I think it makes the new semantics much less yucky if the special case is limited to "the working tree is a subdirectory somewhere under cwd". But does your patch check and notice that /var/tmp is not above the working tree and they are completely unrelated?