On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 16:17:50 +0000, David Roundy wrote:
>> That's great to hear. BTW, you don't actually need to move that back, >> as you can issue "darcs mv a b" *after* a "mv a b"... I still think >> it's something [what originally asked] that can maybe be alleviated, >> but not solved completely (consider directory renames, or a complicated >> reorg of the sources). ... OTOH, I think this is something git >> does/tries to do, doesn't it? > > You're right, directory renames are trickier, but even there, we've got > diff code for directories, so we can quantify relatively easily how much > they've changed. For complicated reorganizations (e.g. filenames change > and file contents get intermingled) it'd still be possible to do > something reasonable, I suspect. AFAICT git does not store metadata about renames and just uses heuristic to detect moving/moving+editing/splitting of files, so something is possible at least in theory. But I would be happy is darcs could just "hint" on simple cases, the user still has the chance to force the creation of a proper patch in the traditional way.. PS I believe I accidentally deleted a message attached to this issue from the web interface, I'm very sorry. _______________________________________________ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
