On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 22:10:42 +0200, Mike Hommey wrote: > On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 10:07:19PM +0200, Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Mike Hommey, Mon, Aug 20, 2007 21:50:37 +0200: > > > On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 09:43:28PM +0200, Jan Hudec <bulb@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Git does not have tracking of file's history either. > > > > > > Well, it has ways to track file's history, with blame and log, for > > > example. There is nothing similar for directories, though it could be > > > possible to do. > > > > It would be not exactly "tracking". You can present the history of > > changes which involved the said directory. > > > > And you could do it from day one: git log -- sub/dir > > It could be possible to really do tracking, too, like it is possible for > files (including renames, moves, etc.) It depends on what you imagine under tracking, but git does not track files in a sense of knowing about renames, moves etc. Git can't tell you -- and by design never will -- that file foo was moved to bar in revision abcdef01. All it can tell you is "looking at the trees, I would guess that file foo was moved to bar in revision abcdef01". That is not tracking in a sense keeping track of anything. It is just digging out interesting similarities between the individual trees. -- Jan 'Bulb' Hudec <bulb@xxxxxx>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
