Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy [off-list ref] writes:
It's not wrong per se. It's an implication that users have to take
when they choose to use it. We may help make it clear that the
symlinks point to untracked files by putting some indication in the
diff.
When I do "git log -Sfoo -- '*.cxx'" I don't really care if bar.cxx is
a symlink. Neither does my compiler. It may be a symlink's target
change that makes "foo" appear. Git could help me detect that quickly
instead of sticking with tracked contents only.
As there is nothing in Git that tells that whatever is pointed at by
bar.cxx that happens to be in your filesystem today had "foo" in it when
that historical version of the commit whose bar.cxx symlink was updated to
point to that file. It is *WRONG* to show the commit as something that
changes bar.cxx to contain "foo" (or more precisely, changes the count of
"foo" in it).
Why is it so hard to understand?
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 5:44 AM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
It's not wrong per se. It's an implication that users have to take
when they choose to use it. We may help make it clear that the
symlinks point to untracked files by putting some indication in the
diff.
When I do "git log -Sfoo -- '*.cxx'" I don't really care if bar.cxx is
a symlink. Neither does my compiler. It may be a symlink's target
change that makes "foo" appear. Git could help me detect that quickly
instead of sticking with tracked contents only.
As there is nothing in Git that tells that whatever is pointed at by
bar.cxx that happens to be in your filesystem today had "foo" in it when
that historical version of the commit whose bar.cxx symlink was updated to
point to that file. It is *WRONG* to show the commit as something that
changes bar.cxx to contain "foo" (or more precisely, changes the count of
"foo" in it).
Why is it so hard to understand?
OK resolving links to untracked contents is bad and should only be
supported in --no-index case, resolving links to tracked contents
should be ok in principal? (I'm not sure how messed up diff code could
be with these changes)
--
Duy