On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 3:15 AM Jeremy Morton <admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 24/04/2023 02:43, Chris Torek wrote: > > ... Alternatively, we could have a > > command -- similar to `git commit --only` in effect > I'm not sure what the utility of the --only thing would be - to detect > renames that didn't have changed content so that all renames could be > done in one pre-commit? I mentioned `git commit --only` here just to point out that `git commit` already has the ability to make a commit without using the current index as the new commit's source. A "just do renames" commit operation (in spite of other changes already made in the current index) would need similar functionality. Exactly how this might work, I haven't defined. > Huh, I just read the docs on [hg mv]... does that mean hg already has > this functionality of being able to store a "this was renamed" marker > in its index? Mercurial does not have an index in the first place. The internal structure of the Mercurial database is an append-only series of changelongs, with files stored as deltas from the previous version of that file (with some exceptions). Files are listed in a manifest, and renaming a file preserves the file's identity despite the change of name. (This internal format is very different from Git's. Git is a content-addressable file system, rather than an append-only changelog.) Chris
