From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git wiki Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 20:27:40 +0200 Organization: At home Message-ID: References: <20060505005659.9092.qmail@science.horizon.com> <20060505181540.GB27689@pasky.or.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri May 05 20:28:28 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fc52A-0002aO-4v for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 05 May 2006 20:28:11 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751206AbWEES2H (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 May 2006 14:28:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751212AbWEES2H (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 May 2006 14:28:07 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:31713 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751206AbWEES2F (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 May 2006 14:28:05 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Fc51v-0002VF-5K for git@vger.kernel.org; Fri, 05 May 2006 20:27:55 +0200 Received: from 193.0.122.19 ([193.0.122.19]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 05 May 2006 20:27:55 +0200 Received: from jnareb by 193.0.122.19 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 05 May 2006 20:27:55 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: git@vger.kernel.org X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.0.122.19 User-Agent: KNode/0.7.7 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Petr Baudis wrote: > The automatic vs. explicit movement tracking is a lot more > controversial. Explicit movement tracking is pretty easy to provide for > file-level movements, it's just that the user says "I _did_ move file > A to file B" (I never got the Linus' argument that the user has no idea > - he just _performed_ the move, also explicitly, by calling *mv). > > However, I guess the explicit movement tracking completely fails if you > go sub-file (without being extremely bothersome for the user) - you > would have to have control over the editor and the clipboard and even > then I'm not sure if you could reach any sensible results. If I remember correctly there are some problems if the explicit file-level contents movement tracking (aka. file rename tracking) is done via equivalent of file-id, inodes, or persistent names. Although it works for many (most?) cases. -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland