On Thu, Sep 27 2018, Nickolai Belakovski wrote: > Will do re: screenshot when I get home, although it's pretty easy to > imagine, the git branch output will have one other branch colored in green, > bit without the asterisk (for one linked worktree) :) > > Also will do re: changing comments to /**/ (didn't know // was from C++, > TIL) and I'll clean up the comments to remove some of the more obvious > ones, but I'll try to keep a comment explaining the basic flow of creating > a nest if statement to evaluate worktree refs for color. > > And yes, I copy/pasted into gmail. I was having trouble setting up > send-email, but I think I may have it figured out now. Should I create a > new thread with send-email? Or maybe reply to this one (I can do that by > specifying the Message-ID to reply to right? You'd run git format-patch master..your-topic with --subject-prefix="PATCH v2" and --in-reply-to="<CAC05386q2iGoiJ_fRgwoOTF23exEN2D1+oh4VjajEvYQ58O1TQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>". Then it'll show up in reply to your v1. You can also for an easier experience do this via GitGitGadget, see https://github.com/gitgitgadget/gitgitgadget looking at its code it seems to have some way to reference a Message-ID, but I don't know how to trigger that. > This is my first time using this workflow, so I appreciate your > patience :) )? No worries, happy to help. > On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 8:33 AM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > >> >> On Thu, Sep 27 2018, Nickolai Belakovski wrote: >> >> > In order to more clearly display which branches are active, the output >> > of git branch is modified to colorize branches checked out in any linked >> > worktrees with the same color as the current branch. >> > >> > This is meant to simplify workflows related to worktree, particularly >> > due to the limitations of not being able to check out the same branch in >> > two worktrees and the inability to delete a branch checked out in a >> > worktree. When performing branch operations like checkout and delete, it >> > would be useful to know more readily if the branches in which the user >> > is interested are already checked out in a worktree. >> > >> > The git worktree list command contains the relevant information, however >> > this is a much less frquently used command than git branch. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Nickolai Belakovski <nbelakovski@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> Sounds cool, b.t.w. would be neat-o to have some screenshot uploaded to >> imgur or whatever just to skim what it looks like before/after. >> >> > diff --git a/builtin/branch.c b/builtin/branch.c >> > index 4fc55c350..65b58ff7c 100644 >> > --- a/builtin/branch.c >> > +++ b/builtin/branch.c >> > @@ -334,11 +334,36 @@ static char *build_format(struct ref_filter >> > *filter, int maxwidth, const char *r >> > struct strbuf local = STRBUF_INIT; >> > struct strbuf remote = STRBUF_INIT; >> > >> > - strbuf_addf(&local, "%%(if)%%(HEAD)%%(then)* %s%%(else) >> %s%%(end)", >> > - branch_get_color(BRANCH_COLOR_CURRENT), >> > - branch_get_color(BRANCH_COLOR_LOCAL)); >> > - strbuf_addf(&remote, " %s", >> > - branch_get_color(BRANCH_COLOR_REMOTE)); >> > + // Prepend the current branch of this worktree with "* " and >> > all other branches with " " >> >> >> We use /* ... */ C comments, not C++-style // (well, it's in C now, but >> not the ancient versions we need to support). >> >> It also seems all of this patch was copy/pasted into GMail or something, >> it has wrapping and doesn't apply with "git am". >> >> Also most/all of these comments I'd say we could better do without, >> i.e. the ones explaining basic code flow that's easy to see from the >> code itself. >>
