Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git wiki

From: Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
Date: May 5, 2006, 09:23 UTC
Message-ID: <20060505092332.GY27689@pasky.or.cz>
In-Reply-To: <20060505062236.GA4544@c165.ib.student.liu.se>

Dear diary, on Fri, May 05, 2006 at 08:22:36AM CEST, I got a letter where Fredrik Kuivinen <freku045@student.liu.se> said that...

Show 16 quoted lines

> On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 08:56:59PM -0400, linux@horizon.com wrote:
> > What people who are asking for explicit rename tracking actually want
> > is automatic rename merging.  If branch A renames a file, and branch B
> > corrects a typo on a comment somewhere, they'd like the merge to
> > both patch and rename the file.  If you can do that, you have met the
> > need, even if your solution isn't the one the feature requester
> > imagined.
> 
> I don't know if you already know this, if you do it might be valuable
> for other readers.
> 
> If the rename is detected by the current rename detection code
> (git-diff-tree -M) then the merge case described above is handled
> perfectly fine by the current git. That is, the rename is followed and
> the patch fixing the typo is applied to the renamed file. This assumes
> that the default merge strategy (recursive) is used.

But the non-obviously important part here to note is that the branch B merely "corrects a typo on a comment somewhere" - the latest versions in branch A and branch B are always compared for renames, therefore if branch A renamed the file and branch B sums up to some larger-scale changes in the file, it still won't be merged properly.

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
Right now I am having amnesia and deja-vu at the same time.  I think
I have forgotten this before.