Re: New orphan worktree?
- From
- Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
- Date
- Jan 6, 2021, 22:56 UTC
- Message-ID
- <jwvk0spr8ta.fsf-monnier+Inbox@gnu.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAEE75_1o+A13+8SBeF9S0SN0ZaYhgK3D1bhbfWNWZWsj9jOXrw@mail.gmail.com>
Show 8 quoted lines
>> not a good example to support the use of the "--orphan" option. > I agree with that part, slathering infrastructure and abstractions on > oneliners (okay, twoliners) is suspect in my book. worktree add, > symoblic ref (really, no need to get lowlevel there, checkout --orphan > does it) done. Tag an empty commit and the sequence gets closer > to a legit oneliner > > git worktree add foo empty; git -C foo checkout --orphan newbranch
FWIW, I'd be quite happy to have an ad-hoc revision which represents "the (currently non-existing) ancestor shared by all branches". Assuming we'd call it "ORPHAN" (other names that come to mind would be "ROOT", "GOD", "∅", "BIGBANG", ...), then
git checkout --orphan newbranch
would become
git checkout -b newbranch ORPHAN
and then I'd also be able to say
got worktree add -b newbranch foo ORPHAN
I've had occasional use for such a pseudo-revision in other circumstances as well and I think I'd find it easier to remember how to use this then the `--orphan` option.
Stefan