From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E99671F424 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 18:11:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751683AbeDXSLo (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Apr 2018 14:11:44 -0400 Received: from mail-ua0-f175.google.com ([209.85.217.175]:36979 "EHLO mail-ua0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750842AbeDXSLn (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Apr 2018 14:11:43 -0400 Received: by mail-ua0-f175.google.com with SMTP id i3so1943514uad.4 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 11:11:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=RZjjs5xkLSj1OlaXVoE0YZDEERDL46CMlaBJySNK9mk=; b=q2DMJrUPnWlBTSrvuAUIsDK8/CN0f/D6OvIFArInjksqEjpwmokrgoRZgxFuNwfvXR 11eoQxAUY1rWNdVHRpsmEXt/VTxW/DgSLO1s2Mp6Dc/zgoaVATp/LKhAfWq31pT7zzMi JmMV7+8caSVA+zprkLZ5asIgeS64jzbrBLpKl9MOACx2CnGYHXrhv7qGBc9nRsWt0zyY 37UMjLC28P5AfkrdTMgOufxhvWIQpBwHmVlPJ40pGHkkSe1o3I+gzBaghG57lLKCkBV8 u7JksZ7LglSpoblkuF7gjDHNIRjAIIZVSWRo0pu5BNQkKpODOog/WGoqFD1chtbpLy+X qNwg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=RZjjs5xkLSj1OlaXVoE0YZDEERDL46CMlaBJySNK9mk=; b=kwjtl6JIX1a90+y/tb44U8dvgv1C0IXs0GCNzVTcot8Y45jbLyg5jigyD4OvfCdcGC xUTW5QbnCpeeY67nZhp0BuU0nSEyHabjhNkeJqgPd/exxEFdFu8VpxXALJfi78y5Gkim v0r7tJi/QiBd7UOueb3P59rMXtBFvtu5TtgATVx6fPTt75wTM3hZlUWHxgTT6TdZI/SW YHGrKZqzmy7/fmp5HBGgGHJkOQShid4QKp1xyQBzUEE1eS3TkaS+2xEgZI8oWgyOSTLj Pm6O0lfNtY/qLumw3AN4HovjAsvcSB+X8w+/kETSc5wsdEOKEeqj9jMJZNurXiyyMnMw Vc+g== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tDiseUeWMCXWg1NubcDxiYwi8huWdlmD2KXOr32Xd2qzj+KA3L8 3bWcjAKm7CpGzJ2ZPENHTCdSba+M3jeS/lmdseY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZo6r8/PaM8O0Bvmo+oXsZ6xtQ5h3qUxyGP1CSq0qIgvmy9bZOnCMeJyn7t4vNhmUiUjTvP+Ifynz3H4MNr+mF8= X-Received: by 10.176.10.26 with SMTP id q26mr4150829uah.23.1524593502366; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 11:11:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.176.95.4 with HTTP; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 11:11:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20180424171124.12064-2-benpeart@microsoft.com> References: <20180420133632.17580-1-benpeart@microsoft.com> <20180424171124.12064-1-benpeart@microsoft.com> <20180424171124.12064-2-benpeart@microsoft.com> From: Elijah Newren Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 11:11:41 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] merge: Add merge.renames config setting To: Ben Peart Cc: "git@vger.kernel.org" , "peff@peff.net" , "gitster@pobox.com" , "pclouds@gmail.com" , "vmiklos@frugalware.org" , Kevin Willford , "Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de" , "eckhard.s.maass@googlemail.com" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 10:11 AM, Ben Peart wrote: > Add the ability to control rename detection for merge via a config setting. Sweet, thanks for including the documentation updates. I lean towards the side of the argument that says that since merge.renameLimit inherits from diff.renameLimit, merge.renames should inherit default value from diff.renames (allow people to not have to repeat themselves as much if they want to use the same rename settings for all cases). Sounds like you and Johannes disagree. I don't feel super strongly about this item, but it'd probably be good to get some other git folks' opinions on this particular point. Other than that unresolved question, and the separate one about whether to go with a different option instead (e.g. merge.defaultStrategy), as being discussed elsewhere in this thread, the patch looks good to me.