From: Mikael Magnusson Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2015 04:48:14 GMT Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] worktree: replace "checkout --to" with "worktree new" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 12:27 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Eric Sunshine writes: > >> On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 12:56 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote >> Speaking of "git worktree new --force", should we revisit "git >> checkout --ignore-other-worktrees" before it gets set in stone? In >> particular, I'm wondering if it makes sense to overload git-checkout's >> existing --force option to encompass the functionality of >> --ignore-other-worktrees as well. I don't think there would be any >> semantic conflict by overloading --force, and I do think that --force >> is more discoverable and more intuitive. > > "git checkout -f" is to throw-away local changes, which is a very > sensible thing to do and I can see why that would be useful, but > does --ignore-other-worktrees have the same kind of common-ness? > > It primarily is a safety measure, and if the user wants to jump > around freely to different commits in multiple worktrees, a more > sensible thing to do so without getting the "nono, you have that > branch checked out elsewhere" is to detach HEADs in the non-primary > worktrees that may want to have the same commit checked out as the > current branch of the primary worktree. > > I would mildly object to make --ignore-other-worktrees more > discoverable and moderately object to make that feature more > accessible by overloading it into "--force". I personally would not > mind if we removed "--ignore-other-worktrees", but that might be > going too far ;-) This probably falls under "not common", but one of my uses for git new-workdir is to check out the current branch in another directory, rebase it to upstream, delete that worktree, and then git reset --hard in the original checkout. The result is a rebased branch that touches a minimum of source files so the rebuild is faster. (In some projects I have a lot of local commits that get rebased, but maybe upstream only touched a single .c file). -- Mikael Magnusson