Re: [PATCH 1/2] Add a basic idea section for git-blame.
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Apr 8, 2010, 16:51 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7v8w8x7ura.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <201004081827.22706.trast@student.ethz.ch>
Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch> writes:
> "Horrifying" seems a fairly harsh word for another way to describe the > process *in linear history* and with default settings, doesn't it?
No, even in a linear setting, if you start from "We discard "-" and take blame for +", you can never get to -M/-C.
Suppose you had "a/b/c/" in the parent and "1/b/c/2/a/3/4/a/5/" in the child ("/" stands for LF). Your "b/c/" would match and you say "I added 1/, 2/a/3/4/a/5/". How would you fix that so that you can say that "a/" after "2/" was actually moved from the first line, and possibly the second "a/" was also copied from the same line, if you discard all "-"?
You can say "in linear history and no -M nor -C, you could annotate things this way", but then you are not describing "blame" anymore; you are describing something else that may work very well in much simpler setting and it might even be how some other SCMs would do it.
But it _is_ horrifying to see that in a section that begins with "blame works as follows".