Re: [RFC] require-work-tree wants more than what its name says
From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:51:09
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:47:29AM +0200, Michael J Gruber wrote:
The only thing I can imagine doing right now is changing require_work_tree() to actually cd to toplevel when possible, so that (like before) on success we're really within. But that changes cwd, of course. In summary, a require_work_tree() now can have three assumptions when it returns with success: - we have a worktree - we are within worktree - cwd has not changed I'd rather break the last one than the second one, but breaking any may be a problem, depending on the caller.
Check out some of the older scripts in contrib/examples. Several of them require_work_tree, but do not cd_to_toplevel immediately; instead, they do it much later for some specific bits. I didn't go through and analyze what would happen in each case if we did the cd_to_toplevel first. I suspect some of it would be pretty mild breakage (like "git commit -F foo" not finding "foo"). But it would be breakage nonetheless. -Peff