Dear diary, on Fri, May 05, 2006 at 08:22:36AM CEST, I got a letter where Fredrik Kuivinen <freku045@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said that... > On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 08:56:59PM -0400, linux@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > What people who are asking for explicit rename tracking actually want > > is automatic rename merging. If branch A renames a file, and branch B > > corrects a typo on a comment somewhere, they'd like the merge to > > both patch and rename the file. If you can do that, you have met the > > need, even if your solution isn't the one the feature requester > > imagined. > > I don't know if you already know this, if you do it might be valuable > for other readers. > > If the rename is detected by the current rename detection code > (git-diff-tree -M) then the merge case described above is handled > perfectly fine by the current git. That is, the rename is followed and > the patch fixing the typo is applied to the renamed file. This assumes > that the default merge strategy (recursive) is used. But the non-obviously important part here to note is that the branch B merely "corrects a typo on a comment somewhere" - the latest versions in branch A and branch B are always compared for renames, therefore if branch A renamed the file and branch B sums up to some larger-scale changes in the file, it still won't be merged properly. -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ Right now I am having amnesia and deja-vu at the same time. I think I have forgotten this before. - : send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html