From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
To: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Cc: Git Mailing list <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: some apparent inaccuracies in "man git-worktree"
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 15:10:34 -0500 (EST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.21.1711141509280.3970@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPig+cRc7Yqeys=oPEgPnyR4qT7qKYLbH1ifnp+6F6N+mSzNVA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 14 Nov 2017, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 3:43 AM, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> wrote:
> > from "man git-worktree", there seem to be some inaccuracies in the
> > SYNOPSIS regarding the "add" subcommand:
> >
> > git worktree add \
> > [-f] [--detach] [--checkout] [--lock] [-b <new-branch>] <path> [<branch>]
> >
> > first, there's no mention of "-B" in that SYNOPSIS, even though it's
> > explained further down the man page.
>
> Omission of "-B" from the synopsis was intentional. From cbdf60fa18
> (worktree: add -b/-B options, 2015-07-06):
>
> worktree: add -b/-B options
>
> One of git-worktree's roles is to populate the new worktree, much like
> git-checkout, and thus, for convenience, ought to support several of the
> same shortcuts. Toward this goal, add -b/-B options to create a new
> branch and check it out in the new worktree.
>
> (For brevity, only -b is mentioned in the synopsis; -B is omitted.)
>
> Whether or not the omission was actually a good decision is
> questionable. The thinking, at the time, may have been that users
> already familiar with "-b" in 'git checkout' would likewise be
> familiar with (and be able to infer) "-B", thus it wasn't important to
> state its existence explicitly in the synopsis, which was already
> getting lengthy. Of course, that decision does not assist newcomers,
> so adding "-B" to the synopsis would help the page better stand on its
> own.
>
> > next, the SYNOPSIS seems misleading as it doesn't make clear that
> > the options -b, -B and --detach are mutually exclusive, which is made
> > clear in the worktree.c source:
> >
> > if (!!opts.detach + !!opts.new_branch + !!new_branch_force > 1)
> > die(_("-b, -B, and --detach are mutually exclusive"));
>
> Failure to update the synopsis to indicate mutual exclusion appears to
> be a simple oversight in ab0b2c53ed (worktree: make --detach mutually
> exclusive with -b/-B, 2015-07-17) in response to:
> https://public-inbox.org/git/55A8F4B1.9060304@drmicha.warpmail.net/
>
> > finally (and maybe i'm just not reading carefully enough), it's not
> > clear what happens if you add a worktree at a given commit without
> > specifying *any* of -b, -B or --detach. the obvious result should be a
> > new worktree checked out at a detached HEAD and, interestingly, if i
> > do that, then from the main tree, i see:
> >
> > $ git worktree list
> > /home/rpjday/k/git 516fb7f2e73d [master]
> > /home/rpjday/k/temp c470abd4fde4 (detached HEAD)
> > $
> >
> > but from within the worktree, if i ask for the status, i see only:
> >
> > $ git status
> > Not currently on any branch.
> > nothing to commit, working tree clean
> > $
> >
> > where i would normally have expected to see "detached HEAD", is there
> > a reason that's not displayed?
>
> Someone more familiar with this bit can correct me if I'm wrong, but I
> believe that the "HEAD detached at/from <branch>" you normally see
> with 'git status' is derived from the reflog, and if it can't find the
> information in the reflog, it instead shows the generic "Not currently
> on any branch" (which is the equivalent of the "(detached HEAD)" you
> see in "git worktree list").
>
> Each worktree has its own newly-created reflog, which does _not_
> contain enough information for 'git status' to present the more
> detailed "detached" message, thus it falls back to the generic one.
> Perhaps seeding the worktree's reflog with a bit more information at
> creation time would be a good #leftoverbits task.
i'm not sure what i can add to this, but i'm going to leave it to
folks higher up the food chain than me to resolve any of the above.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-14 20:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-14 8:43 some apparent inaccuracies in "man git-worktree" Robert P. J. Day
2017-11-14 18:33 ` Eric Sunshine
2017-11-14 20:10 ` Robert P. J. Day [this message]
2017-11-21 19:44 ` Jonathan Nieder
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.2.21.1711141509280.3970@localhost.localdomain \
--to=rpjday@crashcourse.ca \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sunshine@sunshineco.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).