git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: [PATCH v7 1/3] Introduce bulk-move detection in diffcore.

From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date
Oct 28, 2010, 20:20 UTC
Message-ID
<7vr5fa9ij3.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To
<20101025201227.GB3347@home.lan>
Yann Dirson <ydirson@free.fr> writes:
> OTOH, the quoting rules for diff output are quite minimalist, I don't
> know whether adding "*" as a character that requires quotes around the
> filename would be acceptable.
I suspect that would be an unacceptable entry to a slippery slope.
Show 26 quoted lines
>> IOW, is the goal of this series
>> to use the "A/* -> B/" to label the change as bulk directory rename, if
>> the preimage has A/{1,2,3} and the postimage has their moved contents in
>> B/{one,two,three}?
>
> Yes.  But --hide-bulk-move-details would not hide them, as they would
> not be strictly included in the bulk move.  Desite their name change,
> they are however a confirmation that the contents of A/ was move to B/.
>
>> I am wondering about the utility of such an extra information.  If there
>> were no "a/file0 -> b/file3" entry in the example, I would imagine that we
>> could use this "a/* -> b/" information to move "a/file5" to "b/file5" when
>> rebasing this patch to apply to a different preimage that had files other
>> than file{1,2} in directory "a", and I would further imagine that might be
>> a wonderful thing.
>
> I imagined that as well, and that situation would not be a problem:
> since "a/file0 -> b/file3" would be there in the rebased patch,
> "apply" would be able to spot the possible conflict.
>
> OTOH, I had the vision of "merge does automatic moves" when starting
> this project, but got convinced on-list that there are always cases
> where the "automatic move" on merge would be wrong, and that we should
> report a conflict instead.
>
> That would mostly shift the problem to...

That would mostly make this patch not worth worrying about, wouldn't it? What's the point of spending extra cycles to say "many things have moved in the same direction" without turning it into a usable information?

Previous: Yann DirsonNext: Yann Dirson
Message 7 of 11 in “Detection of directory renames”
  1. 0/3 Detection of directory renamesYann Dirson, Oct 23, 2010
  2. 1/3 Introduce bulk-move detection in diffcore.Yann Dirson, Oct 23, 2010
  3. Junio C HamanoOct 25, 2010
  4. Yann DirsonOct 25, 2010
  5. Bulk move and some of its close relativesYann Dirson, Oct 26, 2010
  6. Yann DirsonOct 27, 2010
  7. Junio C HamanoOct 28, 2010
  8. Yann DirsonOct 28, 2010
  9. 2/3 Add testcases for the --detect-bulk-moves diffcore flag.Yann Dirson, Oct 23, 2010
  10. 3/3 [WIP] Allow hiding renames of individual files involved in a directory rename.Yann Dirson, Oct 23, 2010
  11. [RFC] Add --detect-bulk-moves output to unidiff format.Yann Dirson, Oct 24, 2010

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.