On November 29, 2024 6:29 PM, Caleb White wrote: >On Fri Nov 29, 2024 at 5:17 PM CST, rsbecker wrote: >> On November 29, 2024 6:14 PM, Caleb White writes: >>>On Fri Nov 29, 2024 at 4:54 PM CST, rsbecker wrote: >>>> General comment on this series: Is there a mechanism of preserving >>>> existing functionality for those of us who have existing scripts >>>> that depend on the existing branch and worktree naming? >>> >>>Existing worktrees will continue to work as they do now. The only >>>change is the worktree id for new worktrees. However, there's not an >>>option to preserve the existing behavior for new worktrees (nor do I think there >should be). >> >> I do not agree. Companies that have existing scripts should have some >> way to preserve their investment. Just saying "No more worktrees for >> you" is not really considerate. > >How exactly are your scripts depending on the worktree id? There are very few >reasons a script might need to know the worktree id, and I suspect that there's >some confusion here. The worktree name is still used with the `git worktree` >commands, so there no change on that front. The graphic describing this showed the id in addition to the worktree name. During cleanup detection, the directory of the worktree is significant. If that Observation is wrong, I retract all this.
