On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 11:10 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > >> And that same "is this really helping?" reasoning applies equally to > >> the "--orphan" option. > >> > >> I dunno. > >> > > > > Fair enough, new branches based on previous branches makes sense. > > I actually do not have a strong opinion either way. I just wanted > to say that it would be good to make it consistent across "checkout > -b", "switch -c" and "checkout/switch --orphan". > > It would be nice if "checkout -B" and "switch -C" pair offered > existing branches, as the intention of using the capital letter is > clear---the user wants to overwrite an existing one. > > On the other hand, I am OK if "checkout -b", "switch -c" and > "--orphan" offered either: > > (1) nothing, as your patch does, or > > (2) all branches, except for the currently checked out one. Why reject the currently checked out one? If the premise is: "use a current branch to build a new branch name", I don't see a reason to restrict including the current branch here as well. > > It would be preferrable if they did the same thing. > > Thanks. > The problem I see, is that regardless, I would like to see the following: git switch -c new-branch-name <SPACE><TAB> complete all references for the starting point. With this series, that's handled by just checking for "-c/-C" on the command line and enabling all references. There's no positional checks done, so every word can complete to a reference. I don't know offhand how to add completion which depends on the position of the word we're completing, so I'd have to investigate how to make that happen. Thanks, Jake
