Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > I assumed completion would be most useful to complete the start-point, > and so I opted to lean towards fixing completion for -c/-C to complete > all references. However, I don't think the branch name should > necessarily complete from all references and it would make sense to > complete that portion only by local branch names. > > I'm just not sure how best to implement that in our completion logic, > and I would rather ensure that start-point completes properly, if we > have to choose. Sure. What I was saying that if it is easier to implement by completing both new branch name and starting point from the same set, you could choose to include both branches and tags, and your "excuse" for choosing that design could be that a user who wants to fix something in 2.26 release may want the completion and typing progression go like so: $ git switch -c v2.2<TAB> ... offers v2.20, v2.21, ..., v2.26 as candidates ... complete to v2.26 and type "-frotz-fix" $ git switch -c v2.26-frotz-fix $ git switch -c v2.26-frotz-fix v2.2<TAB> ... again offers v2.20, v2.21, ..., v2.26 ;-)
