Message267018
FWIW I doubt Git is any better at this than Mercurial: <https://github.com/python/cpython/blame/master/Lib/test/test_string.py#L190>
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 01:28:12 | martin.panter | set | recipients:
+ martin.panter, gregory.p.smith, benjamin.peterson, r.david.murray, python-dev, serhiy.storchaka, erinspace |
2016-06-03 01:28:12 | martin.panter | set | messageid: <1464917292.69.0.61037900275.issue27185@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2016-06-03 01:28:12 | martin.panter | link | issue27185 messages |
2016-06-03 01:28:11 | martin.panter | create | |
|