There are a bunch of posts on the internet about using git worktree command. As far as I can tell,
most of them are primarily about using worktrees as a replacement of, or a supplement to git
branches. Instead of switching branches, you just change directories. This is also how I originally
had used worktrees, but that didn't stick, and I abandoned them. But recently worktrees grew
on me, though my new use-case is unlike branching.
They wrote they’re using . as placeholder commit messages.
I use f for such [f]ollowup/[f]ixup commits, and a for [a]dditional code/components/changesets. Both keys are trivial to enter. When cleaning it up after, f commits are typically squashed into previous ones, and a commits get a description and/or serve as a base for squashing.
I can see . working well as well, but having a more obvious character (with vertical height/substance) seems preferable.
They wrote they’re using
.as placeholder commit messages.I use
ffor such [f]ollowup/[f]ixup commits, andafor [a]dditional code/components/changesets. Both keys are trivial to enter. When cleaning it up after,fcommits are typically squashed into previous ones, andacommits get a description and/or serve as a base for squashing.I can see
.working well as well, but having a more obvious character (with vertical height/substance) seems preferable.