This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author martin.panter
Recipients benjamin.peterson, erinspace, gregory.p.smith, martin.panter, python-dev, r.david.murray, serhiy.storchaka
Date 2016-06-03.01:28:11
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <>
FWIW I doubt Git is any better at this than Mercurial: <>

Git can automatically pick up file renames and copies when analysing the history, but has no special metadata for this. I understand Mercurial is the opposite (has metadata, but at least by default does not pick up copies and renames from the history). Perhaps that is what Benjamin was thinking of. I understand Git will only pick up movements of the majority of a file, not parts of files (unless something has changed recently).

Perhaps Serhiy can clarify, but I imagine he was proposing something like this (which I have not tested):

A. Start at revision A
B. Remove test_string and rename test_pep292 in its place, giving revision B
C. Merge revisions A and B, and manually merge the contents of the two test_string versions, giving the final revision
Date User Action Args
2016-06-03 01:28:12martin.pantersetrecipients: + martin.panter, gregory.p.smith, benjamin.peterson, r.david.murray, python-dev, serhiy.storchaka, erinspace
2016-06-03 01:28:12martin.pantersetmessageid: <>
2016-06-03 01:28:12martin.panterlinkissue27185 messages
2016-06-03 01:28:11martin.pantercreate