From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Handling renames. Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 11:48:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <1113501260.27227.26.camel@hades.cambridge.redhat.com> <425EB4AE.4010700@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: David Woodhouse , git@vger.kernel.org, James Bottomley X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Apr 14 20:45:22 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DM9KR-0001Py-34 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 14 Apr 2005 20:44:39 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261485AbVDNSrk (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Apr 2005 14:47:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261446AbVDNSrj (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Apr 2005 14:47:39 -0400 Received: from fire.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:19155 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261437AbVDNSq5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Apr 2005 14:46:57 -0400 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j3EIkos4029475 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Thu, 14 Apr 2005 11:46:51 -0700 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j3EIkjra012351; Thu, 14 Apr 2005 11:46:48 -0700 To: "H. Peter Anvin" In-Reply-To: <425EB4AE.4010700@zytor.com> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 required=5 tests= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-osdl_revision__1.35__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.109 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 14 Apr 2005, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > Although Linus is correct in that an SCM doesn't *have* to handle this, > it really feels like shooting for mediocracy to me. We might as well > design it right from the beginning. No. git is not an SCM. it's a filesystem designed to _host_ an SCM, and that _is_ doing it right from the beginning. Keep the abstractions clean. Do _not_ get confused into thinking that git is an SCM. If you think of it that way, you'll end up with crap you can't think about. And at a filesystem layer, "rename" already exists. It's moving an object to a new name in a tree. git already does that very well, thank you very much. But a filesystem rename is _not_ the same thing as an SCM rename. An SCM rename is built on top of a filesystem rename, but it has its own issues that may or may not make sense for the filesystem. Linus