From: Chris Torek Date: Wed, 27 May 2026 03:19:17 GMT Subject: Re: git mv after the fact Message-ID: In-Reply-To: > Chris Torek writes: >> A flag for "git mv" would be convenient (and slightly moreefficient ... > On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 8:09 PM Junio C Hamano wrote: > May be convenient, but I do not get the "efficient" part. A normal `git mv` renames the index entry and the file in the working tree without running `git add` on the *contents*, so there's no new hash computation. Presumably a `git mv --after foo bar` would do the same: verify that there is no existing `bar` in the index, that there is an existing `foo` in the index, and that there is no `foo` but there is a `bar` in the working tree, and then it would rename (add-and-remove, really, because of sorting) the index entry, without scanning the working tree contents. In other words, we skip reading the 3 terabyte file, or whatever. Anyway, comparing to `git rm --cached`: > I think the requested "feature" is not all that outrageous. It > would be a similar value as a morning-after correction measure for > "oops, I moved the file in the filesystem without telling Git". I agree, but I also don't see it as valuable enough to bother writing a proper implementation. I did write it up as a shell script though, long ago. Adding it here via gmail would mess with white space so I'll just provide a link to the file on GitHub: https://github.com/chris3torek/scripts/blob/master/git-mv-after Chris