https://stackoverflow.com/a/1094392/178757
says:
git mv oldname newname
is just shorthand for:
mv oldname newname
git add newname
git rm oldname
--
Best regards,
Jeremy Morton (Jez)
On 22/04/2023 20:47, rsbecker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
No, history is preserved in the rename.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeremy Morton <admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, April 22, 2023 3:45 PM
To: rsbecker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Proposal: tell git a file has been renamed
I read that git mv is basically the equivalent to deleting the old file, creating the new
file, and adding the changes. Isn't it? If so it's gonna have the same problem as I
have now.
--
Best regards,
Jeremy Morton (Jez)
On 22/04/2023 19:54, rsbecker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Saturday, April 22, 2023 2:02 PM, Jeremy Morton wrote:
Yes, I know Linus specifically doesn't store file rename info in Git.
The trouble is, every now and then, I'll come across a situation
where Git doesn't successfully detect that I've renamed a file
because I'm doing something like renaming a class at the same time.
So I'll have a file OldClassNameTests.cs and a NewClassNameTests.cs
but a bunch of lines in that file have also changed from
OldClassName.DoThing() to NewClassName.DoThing(). I can clearly see
that this is a rename, but Git sees enough changed content that it
doesn't realize it, and puts it in as a delete/add, losing the content history.
The standard answer for this is to rename the file in one commit,
then make the changes. That's fine if you know ahead of time you'll
want to do this. However it's a total PITA if you have a bunch of
changes and you realize that a rename has caused this problem. You
now have to back out your changes to the renamed file, add the rename, commit
it, then re-apply the changes.
Could a command be added to git that means you tell Git that counts
as a file rename? Git would add a marker to the staging area that
the file has been renamed, and upon commit, would first generate an
additional commit for each rename before generating the main commit,
ensuring the rename operation counts as an actual rename, and the content's
history is maintained.
Would git mv work in your situation? You can stage changes to the original file,
then use git mv. Or use git mv first. The rename shows as staged in any event.
--Randall
