From: Petr Baudis Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 21:11:32 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] Tweak diff output further to make it a bit less distracting. Message-ID: <20050517211132.GK7136@pasky.ji.cz> In-Reply-To: Dear diary, on Tue, May 17, 2005 at 02:10:35AM CEST, I got a letter where Daniel Barkalow told me that... > On Mon, 16 May 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > One final note: I actually think that "rename patches" make a ton of > > sense, even if git itself doesn't track renames. If we ever have a "smart > > diff" thing that can generate inter-file diffs, I'd like to eventually see > > > > diff -git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c.old > > rename kernel/sched.c kernel/sched.c.old > > old mode 100644 > > new mode 100755 > > I'd like something like: > > diff -git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c.old > filename -- kernel/sched.c > filename ++ kernel/sched.c.old > mode -- 100644 > mode ++ 100755 > --- a/kernel/sched.c > +++ b/kernel/sched.c.old > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > (etc.) > > because I actually start thinking of the two sides as "-" and "+", and I'd > actually have to think about which is "old" and which is "new", and which > way the "rename" line goes, and so forth. I'd actually be happier with > just a "mode -- 100644" line for a deleted file, also. If I'm looking at a > patch, and I read Makefile with '-' and '+' versions of the lists of > objects, and then get to a "new file" line, I have to think about it to > associate the '+' side with having the file and the '-' side with not > having it. Oops, I've somehow completely missed this mail, but I like this idea a lot. What do you think, Linus and Junio? -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ C++: an octopus made by nailing extra legs onto a dog. -- Steve Taylor