On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > That is a particularly bad example: you are not renaming files in that > example! Well, yes and no. I would actually say that it si a particularly *good* example. With git, you can actually record renames exactly this way: you just need to make sure that you don't change the content, and you make it two independent commits. That is in fact how some systems that support "explicit renames" actually do it: the rename is literally a separate option, and cannot necessarily go together with other actions (in particular, several file-ID-following systems do not allow "cross-renames" in the same commit, for example, and you actually have to do them as two separate commits). Git *allows* you to do renames with changes. In fact, I'd normally encourage it. But it doesn't force it, and then renames are totally unambiguos except for the case where you simply have the *same*file* in multiple places, and you remove or add multiple copies (again, you can do that unambiguously too, if you limit it to *one* such rename per commit) Linus - 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