Re: [PATCH] worktree add: improve message for ambiguous remote branch name

From: Yoichi Nakayama <yoichi.nakayama@gmail.com>
Date: Aug 10, 2026, 21:36 UTC
Message-ID: <CAF5D8-u23Z=f02vF1yAHGKRED8DY-v5=BNf7w-yY3vEDmJChDg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALnO6CAdr0ft8KFgGCFX9ueKUdX9-2DwB+SNs3Q8ykw4ne=54Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 10:08 PM D. Ben Knoble <ben.knoble@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 23 quoted lines

> > -static char *dwim_branch(const char *path, char **new_branch)
> > +static char *dwim_branch(const struct add_opts *opts, const char *path, char **new_branch)
> >  {
> >         int n;
> >         int branch_exists;
> > @@ -781,8 +791,14 @@ static char *dwim_branch(const char *path, char **new_branch)
> >
> >         *new_branch = branchname;
> >         if (guess_remote) {
> > +               int num_matches = 0;
> >                 struct object_id oid;
> > -               char *remote = unique_tracking_name(*new_branch, &oid, NULL);
> > +               char *remote = unique_tracking_name(*new_branch, &oid, &num_matches);
> > +               if (!opts->quiet && !remote && num_matches > 1) {
> > +                       if (advice_enabled(ADVICE_CHECKOUT_AMBIGUOUS_REMOTE_BRANCH_NAME))
> > +                               advise(_(message_advice_ambiguous_remote_tracking_branch));
> > +                       warning(_("'%s' matched multiple (%d) remote tracking branches\n"), branchname, num_matches);
> > +               }
> >                 return remote;
> >         }
> >         return NULL;
>
> I suppose the extra warning won't hurt anyone's workflow :) so that's good.

I removed the change (advise and warn) here in the latest patch. But I am still wondering what I should do. I think a warning would be excessive if there is no match, but the user might want to know if there are multiple matches.

Thanks,

-- 
Yoichi NAKAYAMA