Nickolai Belakovski <nbelakovski@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Either way, I do see an issue with the current code that anybody who > wants to know the lock status and/or lock reason of a worktree gets > faced with a confusing, misleading, and opaque piece of code. Sorry, I don't. I do not mind a better documentation for is_worktree_locked() without doing anything else. I do not see any reason to remove fields, split the helper funciton into two, drop the caching, etc., especially when the only justification is "I am new to the codebase and find it confusing".
