On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Petr Baudis wrote:

quoted text
> 
> Dear diary, on Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 07:48:58PM CEST, I got a letter
> where Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> said that...
>> So yeah, I've seen a few strange cases myself, but they've actually been
>> interesting. Like seeing how much of a file was just a copyright license,
>> and then a file being considered a "copy" just because it didn't actually
>> introduce any real new code.
>
> Well it's certainly "interesting" and fun to see, but is it equally fun
> to handle mismerges caused by a broken detection?
>
> I've talked to some people who really didn't mind (or even liked) Git's
> heuristics when it came to _inspecting_ movement of content, but were
> really nervous about merge following such heuristics.

remember, git only stores the results. so when you are merging it doesn't even 
look for renames.

the only time you get renames is after-the-fact when you ask git for a report 
about what changed. then (if you enable rename detection) it will tell you what 
files have changed, and what files look like they may have been renames 
(possibly with changes). but if you don't ask git to look for renames it won't 
bother and you can just ignore the concept entirely.

or if you only want complete renames (as opposed to rename + change) then use 
the option to tell it that you don't want to consider it a rename unless it's 
100% the same (or 99%, or whatever satisfies you)

David Lang
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html