Re: [RFC] use typechange as rename source

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Nov 29, 2007, 14:14 UTC
Message-ID: <20071129141452.GA32670@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <7vir3l2a1i.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 04:02:49PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> I do not think this is a risky change; it won't add too many rename
> sources we did not consider traditionally (typechanges are usually rare
> event anyway).

OK. What next? Did the patch I sent make sense? Do you want a cleaned up version with a commit message and signoff, or does it need work?

> You are copying the source to elsewhere and then completely rewriting it
> (even making it into a different type), so I do not think 'copied' is so
> unreasonable.  An alternative would be to say you renamed it and then
> created something totally different, which would also be reasonable.

I am inclined to leave it as 'copied' for now because it makes some sense and is the least invasive change (and is independent of adding the rename source, so we can always change it later).

-Peff