Re: Package recipes change proposal (system-wide) - name wise

[Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>]

On 07/28/2012 02:22 AM, Anders Darander wrote:
> 
> On 26 jul 2012, at 22:43, "Joshua Lock" <josh@linux.intel.com>
> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2012-07-26 at 20:40 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>> 
>>> Also, as others have mentioned, git can detect move operations if
>>> you tell it to.
>> 
>> FYI the create-pull-request script passes -M40 to git
>> format-patch, which tells git to:
>> 
>> "should consider a delete/add pair to be a rename if more than 40%
>> of the file hasn’t changed."
>> 
>> Though with the size of some recipes perhaps the -M value should
>> be increased, or not passed at all?
> 
> No, the -M option shouldn't be removed. Why would you like to
> increase the percentage needed to handle a delete/add pair as a
> rename? Rather, it could very well be lowered even more, though the
> current 40% might be a good compromise.
> 
> Detecting a delete/add pair as a rename operation with some further
> modifications of the recipe does make reviewing the upgrade patches a
> lot easier...

Right, Anders submitted the -M40 change deliberately:

This was introduced as:

commit c8294d1e6da20f82d444a9d866bf5444a002dc5c
Author: Anders Darander <anders@chargestorm.se>
Date:   Tue Aug 16 15:41:34 2011 +0200

    create-pull-request: increase likelihood of detecting a rename

    Decrease the similarity percentage needed to recognize a
delete/add-pair follow
    as a rename.
    This make reviewing patches easier.

    (From OE-Core rev: 3944f5e02d22b70b3bcd733a80f005dbd8e248a2)

    Signed-off-by: Anders Darander <anders@chargestorm.se>
    Signed-off-by: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>

This hasn't been an issue for me, but I could see that with some of the
minimal recipes that this could trigger some false renames. Still, I
don't see it as a problem.

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Technical Lead - Linux Kernel