Hello Eric, On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 02:52:42PM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote: > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Antoine Tenart <antoine.tenart@xxxxxx> writes: > >> Adds a --name option allowing to specify the name of a worktree when > >> creating it. This allows to have multiple worktrees in directories > >> having the same name (e.g. project0/foo, project1/foo etc...). This > >> commit keeps the previous behaviour by making it the default value, i.e. > >> by using $(basename <path>) as the worktree name when the --name option > >> isn't used. > > > > Hmm, is this related to an earlier discussion > > > > https://public-inbox.org/git/20160625051548.95564-1-barret%40brennie.ca/ > > > > in any way, or is it an independent invention? > > > > The conclusion of that discussion thread was roughly "users > > shouldn't even _care_ about the name, and if they have to use name > > to identify the worktrees to do certain things right now, reducing > > the need for such 'certain things', not making it easy to give a > > user-defined name to a worktree, is the way to go", IIRC. > > Yes, that's correct. The discussion wandered a bit before starting to > converge at [1] and concluding at [2]. > > [1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/CAPig%2BcRNUZZBw%3DF-Q2f3Ehc-8T2iBp4kvDusNRGv4ea5nihQVQ%40mail.gmail.com/ > [2]: https://public-inbox.org/git/CAPig%2BcSEwib1iFyWE5h8-qTbsAC%2BzsaSDSYQnv6otWoOOjWAeA%40mail.gmail.com/ Thanks for the links, I've had a look at the discussion. The problem that raised it was a bit different: it was about reorganizing projects and directory trees, no about creating a new worktree with the same basename as an existing one. I've also had a look at 080739b, introducing find_worktree(), but I don't think that would solve the issue either. So we've left with two solutions: being able to specify the worktree name or having an arbitrary ID (plus some modifications to `git worktree list`) as you proposed. I guess you prefer the later solution. Is there any plan to do this, or anything in progress? Thanks, -- Antoine
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature