RE: Rename conflicts in the index
- From
Edward Thomson <ethomson@microsoft.com>
- Date
- Apr 2, 2013, 21:29 UTC
- Message-ID
- <A54CE3E330039942B33B670D971F857403A0F593@TK5EX14MBXC253.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vr4isaath.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
Junio C Hamano [mailto:gitster@pobox.com] wrote:
Show 9 quoted lines
> Edward Thomson <ethomson@microsoft.com> writes: > > Junio, did you have additional thoughts on this? > > Not at this moment. > > I think we have covered the principles (do not unnecessarily duplicate > information, do not break existing implementations unnecessarily, etc.) already, > and we know how we want to record "one side renamed A to B, the other side > renamed A to C" case, but I do not think the discussion covered all cases yet.
Sorry, I'm not sure what you're asking for - would you just like some more examples of what this looks like with aforementioned exotic conflict types? Or are you looking for something more strict - BNF format, for example?
-ed