Re: [PATCH 2/4] Tweak diff output further to make it a bit less distracting.

On Mon, 16 May 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:

quoted

One final note: I actually think that "rename patches" make a ton of 
sense, even if git itself doesn't track renames. If we ever have a "smart 
diff" thing that can generate inter-file diffs, I'd like to eventually see

	diff -git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c.old
	rename kernel/sched.c kernel/sched.c.old
	old mode 100644
	new mode 100755

I'd like something like:

diff -git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c.old
filename -- kernel/sched.c
filename ++ kernel/sched.c.old
mode -- 100644
mode ++ 100755

--- a/kernel/sched.c
+++ b/kernel/sched.c.old

@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@

(etc.)

because I actually start thinking of the two sides as "-" and "+", and I'd
actually have to think about which is "old" and which is "new", and which
way the "rename" line goes, and so forth. I'd actually be happier with
just a "mode -- 100644" line for a deleted file, also. If I'm looking at a
patch, and I read Makefile with '-' and '+' versions of the lists of
objects, and then get to a "new file" line, I have to think about it to
associate the '+' side with having the file and the '-' side with not
having it.