From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH] The diff-raw format updates. Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 16:14:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <7vwtpsdvgm.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7v1x80dluj.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vvf5cc779.fsf_-_@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20050522184237.GG18500@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <7v64xbdq4y.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vy8a7cavf.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vis1adfvq.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Thomas Glanzmann , Git Mailing List X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon May 23 01:11:32 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DZzbN-0001rV-L4 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 23 May 2005 01:11:21 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261821AbVEVXMc (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 May 2005 19:12:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261827AbVEVXMc (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 May 2005 19:12:32 -0400 Received: from fire.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:4052 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261821AbVEVXM0 (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 May 2005 19:12:26 -0400 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j4MNCJjA029291 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Sun, 22 May 2005 16:12:20 -0700 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j4MNCIAA000443; Sun, 22 May 2005 16:12:18 -0700 To: Junio C Hamano In-Reply-To: <7vis1adfvq.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 required=5 tests= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-osdl_revision__1.40__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.109 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 22 May 2005, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Everything but the last are copies. If the last one have > different src and dst, then it is a rename. Otherwise it > is a "stay". If so, I disagree. Totally. You seem to think that it's a feature that you can't get the same output out of git-diff-helper, and I think that's not a feature, but a total bug. > LT> resulting in: > > That's not a counter-example. You are agreeing to what I said in > this message: No, I'm not agreeing at all. I'm saying that this is unacceptable, and if this was intentional, as you seem to be saying, then it was in my opinion a bad idea. We might as well go back to the original diff format, which had other problems, but they were no worse than the new one. Basically, with the new format as-is, renames and copies cannot be described sanely. That was exactly the same problem as the old format had, except the old format was less verbose. So why do the new format at all? I'm arguing that we should consider it a _requirement_ that "raw diffs" can be translated into te same thing the "-p" flag internally does. Linus