On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 12:08:11PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Antoine Tenart <antoine.tenart@xxxxxx> writes: > > > Being able to manually define the name can also be useful in some (rare) > > cases, where you reorganize your project directory tree. But that's not > > a strong argument for adding this option :-) > > Continuing the rationale that rejected the topic from the earlier > discussion thread, the above is like saying that we should expose > inode number more to the users and and allow users to tell a > specific inode number to use when creating an entry in a directory, > which would allow users to edit the directory with binary editor and > replace the entry with the same inode number to move or rename the > path. The discussion considers that the "name" is an implementation > detail of the worktree subsystem, like inode number is for a > filesystem implementation. A proper solution would be to invent > "mv" command ;-). Hehe :-) -- Antoine
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature