Re: [RFC] use typechange as rename source

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Nov 29, 2007, 00:02 UTC
Message-ID: <7vir3l2a1i.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <20071121171235.GA32233@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

Show 7 quoted lines

> There are a few add-on questions:
>
>   - should typechanges in both directions be used, or just file ->
>     symlink?
>
>   - this actually produces a 'copied' status rather than a 'renamed'
>     since the 'foo' entry does still exist. Is this reasonable?

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).

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.