Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] worktree add: improve message for ambiguous remote branch name

Yoichi Nakayama <[email protected]> writes:

> My initial patch included a warning and advice here,
> but now I don't think they are necessary.
>
> Even if multiple remotes match here, the command completes
> successfully. This could well be the intended behavior
> (just as when there is no match). In that case, a warning
> or advice might be superfluous.

In other words, there is no point in calling dwim_branch() from that
code path, as the end result is exactly the same whether no remotes
match, exactly one remote matches, or two or more remotes match?
Would it then make sense to leave a note there to consider later if
the dwim_branch() call can be removed?

It is a bit hard to believe that is the intended behavior, but OK.
It does not regress the current behavior in any way.

Thanks.