* Choosing between "renaming" and "copy"
@ 2009-03-12 13:01 Samuel Tardieu
2009-03-12 14:44 ` Andreas Ericsson
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Samuel Tardieu @ 2009-03-12 13:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
I renamed a file in my repository, and made a slightly modified copy
of it. It looks like GIT gets confused on which one is the renaming
and which one is the copy, and doesn't favour the 100% identical one
to be chosen as the renaming.
Not a big deal, but maybe git could be more clever here.
% git commit -m "Split into flash and ram alternatives."
[stm32-sk 601462c] Split into flash and ram alternatives.
3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
copy Demo/CORTEX_STM32SK_GCC/{stm32f103r8t6.ld => stm32f103r8t6_flash.ld} (100%)
rename Demo/CORTEX_STM32SK_GCC/{stm32f103r8t6.ld => stm32f103r8t6_ram.ld} (98%)
% git --version
git version 1.6.2.rc2.305.g23381
Sam
--
Samuel Tardieu -- sam@rfc1149.net -- http://www.rfc1149.net/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: Choosing between "renaming" and "copy"
2009-03-12 13:01 Choosing between "renaming" and "copy" Samuel Tardieu
@ 2009-03-12 14:44 ` Andreas Ericsson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Ericsson @ 2009-03-12 14:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Samuel Tardieu; +Cc: git
Samuel Tardieu wrote:
> I renamed a file in my repository, and made a slightly modified copy
> of it. It looks like GIT gets confused on which one is the renaming
> and which one is the copy, and doesn't favour the 100% identical one
> to be chosen as the renaming.
>
> Not a big deal, but maybe git could be more clever here.
>
> % git commit -m "Split into flash and ram alternatives."
> [stm32-sk 601462c] Split into flash and ram alternatives.
> 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> copy Demo/CORTEX_STM32SK_GCC/{stm32f103r8t6.ld => stm32f103r8t6_flash.ld} (100%)
> rename Demo/CORTEX_STM32SK_GCC/{stm32f103r8t6.ld => stm32f103r8t6_ram.ld} (98%)
>
There isn't that much more to be clever about, really. One is a rename+edit,
the other is a copy. The other way around would have been copy+edit + rename
which isn't necessarily an improvement.
Looking at how git internally[1] does things and remembering the meanings of
"copy" and "rename" though, it makes perfect sense to leave it as-is.
[1].
In git, the content is part of the (object) name, so changing the content
makes it closer to a rename than a copy, while changing the location always
makes it a copy, although sometimes coupled with a delete.
--
Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se
OP5 AB www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231
Considering the successes of the wars on alcohol, poverty, drugs and
terror, I think we should give some serious thought to declaring war
on peace.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-03-12 14:46 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-03-12 13:01 Choosing between "renaming" and "copy" Samuel Tardieu
2009-03-12 14:44 ` Andreas Ericsson
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).