Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason [off-list ref] writes:

This has come up a bunch of times. I think that the thing git itself
should be doing is to lean into the same notion that we use for tracking
renames. I.e. we don't, we analyze history after-the-fact and spot the
renames for you.

I've never been a big fan of that quality of git because it is
inherently unreliable.