From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: detecting rename->commit->modify->commit Date: Thu, 1 May 2008 11:28:59 -0400 Message-ID: <20080501152859.GA11469@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <4819CF50.2020509@tikalk.com> <20080501144524.GA10876@sigill.intra.peff.net> <4819DCF1.7090504@tikalk.com> <4819E0AE.40602@tikalk.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Ittay Dror X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu May 01 17:29:52 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JrajE-0004KW-30 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 01 May 2008 17:29:48 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760592AbYEAP3A (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 May 2008 11:29:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760511AbYEAP3A (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 May 2008 11:29:00 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:3197 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760434AbYEAP27 (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 May 2008 11:28:59 -0400 Received: (qmail 14122 invoked by uid 111); 1 May 2008 15:28:58 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 May 2008 11:28:58 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 01 May 2008 11:28:59 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4819E0AE.40602@tikalk.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, May 01, 2008 at 06:24:30PM +0300, Ittay Dror wrote: > Btw, this happened to me in a real use case. I wanted to restructure a > source tree. So I put it under git and started to happily move things > around, always committing after a move. I thought that git will correctly > identify these moves and show me the differences I made after (in a > separate commit). But it doesn't, and now that I want to prepare a > summary of the changes I've made, I'm stuck with a huge diff that is hard > to make sense of. If you have a specific case where you think renames should have been detected but they weren't, by all means, please share it. It's possible that there is a bug in the rename detection, or that the limits are not set correctly, and we could improve it. -Peff