Re: [PATCH] worktree: add: introduce the --name option

Antoine Tenart [off-list ref] writes:

Being able to manually define the name can also be useful in some (rare)
cases, where you reorganize your project directory tree. But that's not
a strong argument for adding this option :-)

Continuing the rationale that rejected the topic from the earlier
discussion thread, the above is like saying that we should expose
inode number more to the users and and allow users to tell a
specific inode number to use when creating an entry in a directory,
which would allow users to edit the directory with binary editor and
replace the entry with the same inode number to move or rename the
path.  The discussion considers that the "name" is an implementation
detail of the worktree subsystem, like inode number is for a
filesystem implementation.  A proper solution would be to invent
"mv" command ;-).

On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 12:08:11PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Antoine Tenart [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Being able to manually define the name can also be useful in some (rare)
cases, where you reorganize your project directory tree. But that's not
a strong argument for adding this option :-)

Continuing the rationale that rejected the topic from the earlier
discussion thread, the above is like saying that we should expose
inode number more to the users and and allow users to tell a
specific inode number to use when creating an entry in a directory,
which would allow users to edit the directory with binary editor and
replace the entry with the same inode number to move or rename the
path.  The discussion considers that the "name" is an implementation
detail of the worktree subsystem, like inode number is for a
filesystem implementation.  A proper solution would be to invent
"mv" command ;-).

Hehe :-)

-- 
Antoine