Re: Basename matching during rename/copy detection

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Jun 21, 2007, 15:53 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706211649520.4059@racer.site>
In-Reply-To: <467A9B2C.2060907@midwinter.com>

Hi,

On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Steven Grimm wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > Yes. And Git explicitely allows what I call stupid. And yes, those
> > _identical_ files in the test suit should probably all be folded into
> > single files, and the places where they are used should reference _that_
> > single instance.
> >   
> 
> Two files that are identical in the current revision have not necessarily
> been identical from the beginning. Doing what you suggest will cause you to
> lose the history of all but one of those files.
> 
> Files can absolutely become identical in the real world. I know that for a
> fact because it happened to me just this week (see my "Directory renames"
> message from a few days ago.)

No, that message did not convince me. It was way too short on the side of facts.

And no, I do not think that two unrelated files can get exactly the same content.

Be that as may, even _if_ there were such a case, I'd still try to reuse the same file in the working directory. Just because Git can deal efficiently with millions of identical files does not mean that a working directory can, or worse, human developers.

Ciao, Dscho