Hi, On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 11:04:42AM +0000, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Julian Phillips wrote: > > > > > You might want to have a look at the git-new-workdir script in > > > contrib, it does basically the same thing. It's been there for > > > about 10 months now. It was based on an email from Junio: > > > > > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/41513/ > > > > FWIW I have a patch to do something like that in "git branch" itself. > > > > > However, there are some caveats about using this approach, basically > > > about the fact that there is nothing stopping you from updating refs > > > that are currently checked out in another directory and causing > > > yourself all sorts of pain ... the topic has cropped up a couple of > > > times on the list since the script was added. > > > > I agree; maybe we should have a telltale file > > "refs/heads/<bla>.checkedout" which is heeded by "git checkout" and > > "git branch -d/-D", as well as update_ref() (should only update that > > ref when it HEAD points to it)? > > Why not generalize this into HEAD.$branch (thus limiting to one checkout > per branch) or HEAD.$checkoutdir ? Because multiple working trees for the same repository will always be a second-class citizen. And I would rather not affect the common case too much. Having a "lock" file which is heeded by just a few places which are supposed to update refs (thinking about it, just update_ref() should be enough), is at least a well-contained change. Ciao, Dscho - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
