Torsten Bögershausen <tbo...@web.de> writes: > Before we put this into stone: > Does it make sense to say "renormalize" instead of "rehash" ? > (That term does exist already for merge. > And rehash is more a technical term, rather then a user-point-of-view > explanation)
I do not mind "renormalize" at all. As to the toy patch, I think it needs to (at least by default) turn off the add_new_files codepath, and be allowed to work without any pathspec (in which case all tracked paths should be renormalized). And we really shouldn't do the "rm && add", which would not work well on platforms where filesystem without executing-bit support is prevalent. This new feature is primarily needed on platforms where CRLF line endings are used, and unfortunately these two sets of platforms overlap quite a bit X-<.
