On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclo...@gmail.com> writes: > >> As explained in the document. This option has an advantage over the >> command sequence "git worktree add && git worktree lock": there will be >> no gap that somebody can accidentally "prune" the new worktree (or soon, >> explicitly "worktree remove" it). >> >> "worktree add" does keep a lock on while it's preparing the worktree. >> If --lock is specified, this lock remains after the worktree is created. >> >> Suggested-by: David Taylor <david.tay...@dell.com> >> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclo...@gmail.com> >> --- >> A patch that adds --lock may look like this. > > This looks more like "I do believe the idea by David is a useful > addition and here is how I did it to the best of my ability---let's > make sure we polish it for eventual inclusion" than a mere "it may > look like so---do whatever you want with it" patch. > > To me "git worktree add --lock" somehow sounds less correct than > "git worktree add --locked", but I'd appreciate if natives can > correct me. > > Thanks.
I think either "--lock" or "--locked" works for me. "--locked' suggests "this is the state I want the tree in" while "--lock" suggests "this is the action I want taken on the tree". Thanks, Jake
