Re: [PATCH] worktree: add per-worktree config files

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy  <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:

> This extension is most useful in multiple worktree setup because you
> now have an option to store per-worktree config (which is either
> .git/config.worktree for main worktree, or
> .git/worktrees/xx/config.worktree for linked ones).

Heh.  "This is useful if you have multiple" is true without saying,
because this is totally useless if you have only a single worktree.
I'd suggest writing the above without "most useful".

> This design places a bet on the assumption that the majority of config
> variables are shared so it is the default mode. A safer move would be
> default writes go to per-worktree file, so that accidental changes are
> isolated.

Warning: devil's advocate mode on.

Done in either way, this will confuse the users.  What is the reason
why people are led to think it is a good idea to use multiple
worktrees, even when they need different settings?  What do they
want out of "multiple worktrees linked to a single repository" as
opposed to just a simple "as many clones as necessary"?  Reduced
disk footprint?  Is there a better way to achieve that without the
downside of multiple worktrees (e.g. configuration need to be
uniform)?

> (*) "git config --worktree" points back to "config" file when this
>     extension is not present so that it works in any setup.

Shouldn't it barf and error out instead?  A user who hasn't enabled
the extension uses --worktree option and misled to believe that the
setting affects only a single worktree, even though the change is
made globally---that does not sound like a great end-user experience.