Re: [PATCH 1/2] Add a basic idea section for git-blame.

Thomas Rast [off-list ref] writes:

"Horrifying" seems a fairly harsh word for another way to describe the
process *in linear history* and with default settings, doesn't it?

No, even in a linear setting, if you start from "We discard "-" and take
blame for +", you can never get to -M/-C.

Suppose you had "a/b/c/" in the parent and "1/b/c/2/a/3/4/a/5/" in the
child ("/" stands for LF).  Your "b/c/" would match and you say "I added
1/, 2/a/3/4/a/5/".  How would you fix that so that you can say that "a/"
after "2/" was actually moved from the first line, and possibly the second
"a/" was also copied from the same line, if you discard all "-"?

You can say "in linear history and no -M nor -C, you could annotate things
this way", but then you are not describing "blame" anymore; you are
describing something else that may work very well in much simpler setting
and it might even be how some other SCMs would do it.

But it _is_ horrifying to see that in a section that begins with "blame
works as follows".