On 11/22, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > I didn't consider that, I think you are right, and the flag should > > apply in that case as well. I think at that point we may as well pass > > this flag through to the 'git branch' call, and let users set up > > tracking if they want to, the same way it works in 'git branch'. > > OK, so tracking is set up by default in the current implementation > of "git worktree" (even without your proposed update), but we will > stop doing so, and instead take an explicit "--track" option (or > "--no-track" to countermand an earlier "--track" on the command line > and/or a default configured with branch.autosetupmerge) just like > "git branch" does? I was a bit brief in the above. The full story is that tracking is set up by default if the '<branch>' given is a remote tracking branch, and isn't set up otherwise, the same way as 'git branch' behaves. What I'm planning to do is introduce a --[no-]track flag to override this behaviour. As 'git worktree' really just calls 'git branch' internally, the branch.autoSetupMerge configuration is also respected. > I think that it is very sensible thing to make sure that "branch", > "checkout -b" and "worktree", i.e. the three ways to create a branch > to work on (the latter two being short-hands), behave consistently. So in summary "branch" and "worktree" already behave consistently, the plan is just to introduce the same "--[no-]track" flag as branch to allow users to override the behaviour the same way as they are allowed in "branch". > Thanks.
