On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 07:29:54PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > Yes, we do suck at rename following. The problem is that it is partially > [...] > This is no excuse not to do proper source tree reorganization. I think this is the crux of our disagreement. I don't agree that your proposal is any way more "proper" than what is there now. Leaving the rename issue aside (i.e., if we were starting a new project), I would still be slightly against a src/ directory. I find them annoying. But I don't care _that_ much, and I would rather not waste either of our time debating it more. I would much rather you spend your time on pack v4. :) > I disagree. This is like saying: "renames are not well supported, so > let's avoid them while using Git." People used to say that of merges > with CVS. Are we going to follow suit de facto? Imagine the Git > detractors taking our source tree mess to exemplify this Git flaw since > "Git developers themselves are unwilling to move files around because > Git sucks at it". For the record, part of my argument was that renaming is annoying to some degree in _all_ systems, not just git. > > I do think it's wrong to say "renames can't be > > done"; I just the cost needs to be considered. > > Instead, why not saying: "Rename tracking is not as optimal as it could > be, so let's work it out." ? I did also say that. :) -Peff -- 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