From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: Basename matching during rename/copy detection Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 16:53:31 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <20070621030622.GD8477@spearce.org> <200706211050.03519.andyparkins@gmail.com> <200706211344.47560.andyparkins@gmail.com> <467A9B2C.2060907@midwinter.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Matthieu Moy , Andy Parkins , git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano To: Steven Grimm X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Jun 21 17:53:40 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 1I1OyZ-0006Qp-Ta for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 21 Jun 2007 17:53:40 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752779AbXFUPxh (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2007 11:53:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752682AbXFUPxh (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2007 11:53:37 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:59098 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752521AbXFUPxg (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2007 11:53:36 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 21 Jun 2007 15:53:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO [138.251.11.74]) [138.251.11.74] by mail.gmx.net (mp045) with SMTP; 21 Jun 2007 17:53:34 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19/IrJRdRl/KuhqPwfkwwr5Eb+9kZDuISURnbf7OX M8FlLjHrG0wpIi X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <467A9B2C.2060907@midwinter.com> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Steven Grimm wrote: > Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > Yes. And Git explicitely allows what I call stupid. And yes, those > > _identical_ files in the test suit should probably all be folded into > > single files, and the places where they are used should reference _that_ > > single instance. > > > > Two files that are identical in the current revision have not necessarily > been identical from the beginning. Doing what you suggest will cause you to > lose the history of all but one of those files. > > Files can absolutely become identical in the real world. I know that for a > fact because it happened to me just this week (see my "Directory renames" > message from a few days ago.) No, that message did not convince me. It was way too short on the side of facts. And no, I do not think that two unrelated files can get exactly the same content. Be that as may, even _if_ there were such a case, I'd still try to reuse the same file in the working directory. Just because Git can deal efficiently with millions of identical files does not mean that a working directory can, or worse, human developers. Ciao, Dscho