From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: VCS comparison table Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 14:52:25 -0400 Message-ID: <20061017185225.GE2867@fieldses.org> References: <9e4733910610140807p633f5660q49dd2d2111c9f5fe@mail.gmail.com> <45340713.6000707@utoronto.ca> <4534656B.7080105@utoronto.ca> <7v64ejqx3a.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Aaron Bentley , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 17 20:53:09 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GZu3Y-00013L-Nh for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2006 20:52:53 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751429AbWJQSwe (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Oct 2006 14:52:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751427AbWJQSwe (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Oct 2006 14:52:34 -0400 Received: from mail.fieldses.org ([66.93.2.214]:30189 "EHLO pickle.fieldses.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751425AbWJQSwc (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Oct 2006 14:52:32 -0400 Received: from bfields by pickle.fieldses.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GZu37-0003fG-Ux; Tue, 17 Oct 2006 14:52:25 -0400 To: Junio C Hamano Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7v64ejqx3a.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 11:23:53PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Aaron Bentley writes: > > > Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > >>> You'll note we referred to that bevhavior on the page. We don't think > >>> what Git does is the same as supporting renames. AIUI, some Git users > >>> feel the same way. > >> > >> Oh, we start another flamewar again? > > > > I'd hope not. It sounds as though you feel that supporting renames in > > the data representation is *wrong*, and therefore it should be an insult > > to you if we said that Git fully supported renames. > > Not recording and not supporting are quite different things. Yes. There's a risk of confusing a feature with an implementation detail. From http://bazaar-vcs.org/RcsComparisons: "If a user can rename a file in the RCS without loosing the RCS history for a file, then renames are considered supported. If the operation resultes in a delete/add (aka "DA pair"), then renames are not considered supported. If the operation results in a copy/delete pair, renames are considered "somewhat" supported. The problem with copy support is that it is hard to define sane merge semantics for copies." The first sentence sounds like a description of a user-visible feature. The rest of it sounds like implementation. And git probably has some deficiencies here, but it'd be more useful to identify them in terms of things a user can't do. --b.