Re: [bug] Possible Windows 'git mv' bug

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Feb 1, 2016, 06:32 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1602010723510.2964@virtualbox>
In-Reply-To: <56AE2DBF.1010502@web.de>

Hi Aaron,

On Sun, 31 Jan 2016, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> On 2016-01-31 15.03, Aaron Gray wrote:
> > 
> > I think I have found a possible difference in behaviour between
> > Windows git commandline distro and Linux git
> > 
> > basically If I do a :-
> > 
> >     git mv logger.h Logger.h
> > 
> > I get the following :-
> > 
> >     fatal: destination exists, source=lib/logger.h, destination=lib/Logger.h
> > 
> > It looks and smells like a bug to me !

Thanks for your bug report. Having said that, I would like to suggest a couple improvements for future reference:

Git for Windows' home page (https://git-for-windows.github.com/#contribute) asks explicitly to please open tickets on Git for Windows' bug tracker (https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/issues).

Also, at least one crucial bit of information is missing: the Git for Windows version. Typically this is enough, but the Windows version is often also crucial. To prevent crucial bits of information from missing, I highly recommend volunteering information up front (in my mind, a good rule of thumb is: spend as much care crafting your bug report and thinking about what to include as you would wish the combined readership would spend on helping you). If I may say so, I provided a good list of advices to help crafting bug reports: https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/wiki/Issue-reporting-guidelines

> Which version of Git are you using ?
> Because it is fixed in the latest version in Git and Git for Windows.

Another piece of advice I detail in our issue reporting guidelines is to search the existing bug tracker (one purpose of the tracker is to keep track of what has been reported and what has not yet been reported, after all).

And indeed, I opened this ticket:

	https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/issues/419

... whose initial report incidentally also lacks the crucial information mentioned above! So I have to step up my own game, too.

This report *also* includes detailed information, though, in particular that Torsten fixed this issue a long time ago, which suggests to me that you are somehow still stuck with the 1.x train (run `git version` to find out).

Ciao, Johannes