From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 01:28:26 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] branch: colorize branches checked out in a linked working tree the same way as the current branch is colorized
Message-ID: <xmqqsh1ue7gl.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <20180928010514.GB11281@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> Alternatively, %(HEAD) could return "*" or "+" depending on whether it's
> the current worktree head. That would mildly break an existing format
> like:
>
>   %(if)%(HEAD)%(then) *%(color:green)%(end)%(refname)
>
> since it would start coloring worktree HEADs the same way. It would be
> rewritten as:
>
>   %(if:equals=*)%(HEAD)%(then)...real HEAD...
>   %(else)%(if:equals=+)%(HEAD)%(then)...worktree HEAD...
>   %(else)...regular ref...
>   %(end)%(end)
>
> I think that's perhaps nicer, but I'm not sure we want even such a minor
> regression.

I tend to think it is not worth having to worry about it by changing
the meaning of %(HEAD) marking to save the effort to find a new
token to fill that placeholder.  Your %(worktreeHEAD) is good
enough, I would think.