Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> Depending on the nature of the change in question, it may match well >> or worse to what you are trying to find out. When you are trying to >> say "What were you smoking when you implemented this broken logic?", >> using -C may be good, but when your question is "Even though all the >> callers of this function live in that other file, somebody moved >> this function that used to be file static in that file to here and >> made it public. Why?", you do not want to use -C. >> >> I am reasonably sure that in the finished code later in the series >> it will become configurable, but a fallback default is better to be >> not so expensive one. > > The script's purpose is to find related commits, -CCC does that, does it not? As I already said in the above, the answer is no, when you are trying to find who moved the code from the original place. >> Makes sense to start from the preimage so that you can find out who >> wrote the original block of lines your patch is removing. >> >> But then if source is /dev/null, wouldn't you be able to stop >> without running blame at all? You know the patch is creating a new >> file at that point and there is nobody to point a finger at. > > A patch can touch multiple files. So? What line range would you be feeding "blame" with, for such a file creation event? -- 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