From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com [208.72.237.25]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19D82DDEE4 for ; Tue, 9 Sep 2008 10:59:08 +1000 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: avorontsov@ru.mvista.com Subject: Re: git apply vs. renamed files index mismatch References: <1220900995-11928-1-git-send-email-becky.bruce@freescale.com> <1220900995-11928-2-git-send-email-becky.bruce@freescale.com> <48C57A92.6060608@freescale.com> <20080908212717.GA21338@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> <48C59B71.3040902@freescale.com> <20080908215441.GA924@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 17:55:47 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20080908215441.GA924@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> (Anton Vorontsov's message of "Tue, 9 Sep 2008 01:54:41 +0400") Message-ID: <7vabeicf3g.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Scott Wood , git@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Anton Vorontsov writes: > ..rename and changes ideally go in separate patches. > > IIRC this also helps git to track renames (it can easily compare > hashes instead of guessing). It does not help much, and it is frowned upon (at least by well educated users in git circle) because such a split patch hurts reviewability.