Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > It does sound potentially expensive, though, and might mean a lot > more work in merge-recursive to handle that extra information. Is that a > path we want to take at some point? Probably you can start with backend specific option (e.g. -Xbreak=yes) to experiment. We made recursive the default not because it deals with renames (in a broken way) but primarily because it handles criss-cross better; at some point we might also want to add another backend specific option (e.g. -Xrename=off) to allow the users to keep the "recursive" aspect of the strategy while declining a more expensive (and brittle) rename handling to take effect. My gut feeling is that -Xbreak=yes, once the code does work well enough, would have to become the default. It would make the default mode of merge possibly quite expensive but it is Ok as long as we give projects with simple/clean history an easy way to use either "recursive -Xrename=off" or even "resolve" to avoid cost that is unnecessary to handle their needs. -- 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