Robert Collins wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-10-17 at 01:45 +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>>
>> If you really, really think about it: it makes much more sense to record
>> your intention in the commit message. So, instead of recording for _every_
>> _single_ file in folder1/ that it was moved to folder2/, it is better to
>> say that you moved folder1/ to folder2/ _because of some special
>> reason_!
>
> Just a small nit here: bzr does /not/ record the move of every file: it
> records the rename of folder1 to folder2. One piece of data is all thats
> recorded - no new manifest for the subdirectory is needed.
>
> Of course, a user can choose to move all the contents of a folder and
> not the folder itself - its up to the user.
>
> By recording the folder rename rather than the contents rename, we get
> merges of new files added to folder1 in other branches come into folder2
> automatically, without needing to do arbitrarily deep history processing
> to determine that.
Hmmm... I wonder how well git manages that (merge with renamed directory).
folder1/a --> folder2/a --------> folder2/a
folder1/b --> folder2/b / folder2/b
\ / folder2/c
\-------> folder1/a ---/
folder1/b
folder1/c
I wonder how bzr manages "separate some files into subdirectory" (and how
well git does that), i.e. we have
sub-file1
sub-file2
filea
fileb
In the 'main' branch we separated "sub-*" files into subdirectory
sub/file1
sub/file2
filea
fileb
How would that merge with adding new sub-* file on the branch to be merged?
sub-file1
sub-file2
sub-file3
filea
fileb
Or how bzr manages sub-level movement, such as splitting file into two,
or joining two files into one file.
P.S. is anyone working on --follow option for renames following path
limiting?
--
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
ShadeHawk on #git
-
To unsubscribe from this list: 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