Messages in this thread | | | From | Junio C Hamano <> | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL 05/11] SoC-level changes for tegra and omap | Date | Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:15:42 -0800 |
| |
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 12:39 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux > <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote: >> >> What about using -C instead (which implies -M, but also detects copies) ? > > I don't mind -C. It sometimes causes differences to what I see by > default, but those differences are often interesting. > > But while it's interesting and relevant (unlike the non-rename patch > that is just noisy), it also can hide lots of lines. With -C, you can > get a diffstat that is actually fairly small, but that adds a lot of > lines to the kernel (because somebody just copied large files with > small changes), and if that happens I do want to see it as a "big > change". So for me, the plain "just show renames" is a good default. > > So there is absolutely nothing wrong with -C. It's not what I use, but > when I see that the diffstats don't match, it's easy to notice why, > and that information is often fairly interesting, so I don't mind.
How about encouraging people to use stock "git request-pull" instead?
Then best/better practices can be captured as improvement patches to it, instead of being spread as updates to many people's homebrew scripts, no?
| |