Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 5:19 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I do not necessarily think that it is a good approach to forbid the same >> branch to be checked out in two different places, by the way. One reason >> people would want to keep multiple workdirs is so that while they are >> still working on a branch and are not yet at a good "stop point" to even >> make a temporary commit to get interrupted, they find it sometimes >> necessary to be able to build the tip of that same branch and even make a >> small in-working-tree fixes (which later will be carried back to the >> primary branch). The problem arises only when one of the repositories try >> to update or delete the branch while it is checked out in another working >> tree. > > I think of two options: > > - detach from the already locked branch (pretty much like what we do > with tags now) > > - refuse normally but let "checkout -f" do it anyway. However the > checkout lock will remain at the original worktree. If you want to > update branch from the second checkout, do "commit -f" and take > responsibility for your action. Sorry, what problem are you trying to solve? Does that "checkout -f" meant to nuke the local changes that are not yet at a good "stop point"? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html