-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Aaron Bentley wrote:
quoted
All solutions have disadvantages. We prefer the disadvantages that come
from using file-ids over the disadvantages that come from using
content-based rename detection.
That's fine, but please don't call the git rename handling "maybe" or
"partial", like a lot of people seem to do.
Git _definitely_ handles renames, both in everyday life and when merging.
Hmm. Could you say more here? The only examples I can think of for
handling renames are situations that can be expressed as a merge.
For example, populating a working tree can be expressed as:
BASE: nothing
THIS: nothing
OTHER: aabbccddee
Or revert can be expressed as
BASE: current
THIS: current
OTHER: aabbccddee
Or fast-forward pull
BASE: last-commit
THIS: current
OTHER: aabbccddee
Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFFOQuv0F+nu1YWqI0RAotBAKCEEzvh1Cc2jJH4NIEBwoYrDJlbUQCgiPBF
DZ4+hSbkjbvgOwbT4+oLzFA=
=wSgK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----