From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Rename handling Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 11:48:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <45FED31B.8070307@midwinter.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Steven Grimm , John Goerzen , git@vger.kernel.org To: Nicolas Pitre X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Mar 19 19:49:03 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HTMui-0000Rs-Dx for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 19 Mar 2007 19:49:00 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751185AbXCSSs7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:48:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751199AbXCSSs6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:48:58 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.24]:48409 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751185AbXCSSs6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:48:58 -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 l2JImZcD003166 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Mon, 19 Mar 2007 11:48:35 -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 l2JImYDG014267; Mon, 19 Mar 2007 10:48:34 -0800 In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.483 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-osdl_revision__1.119__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.176 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, 19 Mar 2007, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > And some will argue that explicit renames are susceptible to user error > misidentifying the rename too, certainly in the 1% figure of all renames > if not more. It's much worse than that. I will *guarantee* that renames are missed when they come in as traditional patches, for example. That's a 100% error rate right there, not some "1%" one. And even if people never make mistakes, and people *only* use the native SCM "rename" functions, I guarantee that the downsides of thinking that files have identities is still much much bigger than the upsides. We've already shown that the git "blame" functionality is strictly more powerful than anything based on renames. So learn to love the bomb. Rename tracking is *wrong*. Linus