On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 12:08:11PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Antoine Tenart <antoine.tenart@ack.tf> writes:
> 
> > Being able to manually define the name can also be useful in some (rare)
> > cases, where you reorganize your project directory tree. But that's not
> > a strong argument for adding this option :-)
> 
> Continuing the rationale that rejected the topic from the earlier
> discussion thread, the above is like saying that we should expose
> inode number more to the users and and allow users to tell a
> specific inode number to use when creating an entry in a directory,
> which would allow users to edit the directory with binary editor and
> replace the entry with the same inode number to move or rename the
> path.  The discussion considers that the "name" is an implementation
> detail of the worktree subsystem, like inode number is for a
> filesystem implementation.  A proper solution would be to invent
> "mv" command ;-).

Hehe :-)

-- 
Antoine