From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_DKIM_INVALID, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D417A1F42D for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 08:58:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751938AbeC0I6W (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2018 04:58:22 -0400 Received: from mail-qt0-f178.google.com ([209.85.216.178]:39720 "EHLO mail-qt0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751752AbeC0I6U (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2018 04:58:20 -0400 Received: by mail-qt0-f178.google.com with SMTP id v11so22883857qtj.6 for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 01:58:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=cb2Jga62bQebp84MCpMv+uXyFWMpwxjhLkZjkqKwNOc=; b=NDyX41ufkaH1OKusMCprNIPYpNfe1kFlgLGL+70B32UoDehY/HDSDriDRCVpmXwqy9 2TvJXmavJeP/IRx+YcYZPfPFOQ4OvxdietoWHU1F9b/HKw4MsorYFoNKKLWWZLWRoVVM 0kWxZr2j+NiXPp4Oe4YFdJX1rWLgPpRDPtG6rGVmOPCl/lDAVbniI8rJJwv/bVRgEXYO UCcd29BXIQCYx74hxzuF5InM/34n8zjjg6NwpbOjsrNuLN2ZYaT5L8IF4J1+GykF4tez WapLFoqtMb3KFU988syuqsQ+3qVdx/abs6pewW1Wwfc5Sa9r5Oe6lHet9q7dZLdVGr2i X1Pw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=cb2Jga62bQebp84MCpMv+uXyFWMpwxjhLkZjkqKwNOc=; b=sCEHlqVbfJ9YXmnQvdeT4xx3BIRYwJZAe+JbLW3nO1xYi0q753anwFO6nfDG9ImjJx 2VC7ZilPgRU5urK1zNNUHm/WDS7KcYQjkSaEJ36rt8+OG6uXB2Bemei5p3YIlk8JdLhp CmdS4sb/BeIiRIxO/G+eKuXhvGAbSg5uSlTVgQPYlCsvzIrQ+WmnwwaydscM2HvEA2zB GqWAt1b82kq3rNqB4egEzhacJU1jlcCZP5ebOFFc9MZNx5RmujtwfVKZVc1E+NtYy2N6 Cj6SxgSU3Eqm879GxaGVAFT6PRdInOwyijL2M1Lyw4anPHBQipJZHBMteCrdTh8QDu2x wsnA== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7Gzh8jr1qUQYcW3AYwdlqK2bat3kXrJpa2CtIpeImpcVWxCd3RN 1isdw9n31U1Qdg7LRPAr4YsflRokcsnSiR5Jod0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELtYbpchLmqj3B6Sjyx6cUoMGfUGn75kY9i213uWNGLuULr7MoX95p1KebGs4jJnJv1iUN6g/eNm9lJVxcIACKI= X-Received: by 10.200.1.2 with SMTP id e2mr57626936qtg.121.1522141099991; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 01:58:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.174.202 with HTTP; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 01:58:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20180325134947.25828-1-t.gummerer@gmail.com> References: <20180317222219.4940-1-t.gummerer@gmail.com> <20180325134947.25828-1-t.gummerer@gmail.com> From: Eric Sunshine Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 04:58:19 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: vQ4e3RCIf_slIjv6ciEjUaInfrg Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/6] worktree: teach "add" to check out existing branches To: Thomas Gummerer Cc: Git List , =?UTF-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41jIER1eQ==?= , Junio C Hamano Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Thomas Gummerer wrote: > Thanks Eric for the review of the previous round and Duy and Junio for > additional comments. > This round should address all of Eric's comments from the previous round. Thanks, it appears to cover my review comments from the previous round. I do have some additional comments on this round (which I could have raised with the previous round if I had thought of them at the time). > As explained in more detail in a reply to the review comment directly, > I did not add an enum to 'struct add_opts', for 'force_new_branch' and > 'checkout_existing_branch', but instead removed 'force_new_branch' > from the struct as it's not required. Makes sense. In fact, I had thoughts along these lines during your previous dwim-ery series. See my comments on patch 3/6. > The rest of the updates are mainly in the user facing messages, > documentation and one added test. > Interdiff below: The interdiff looks sane. Unfortunately, due to UI regressions, I'm having second thoughts about whether this series is going in the right direction. See my comments on patch 2/6.