[ On Wednesday, February 2, 2005 at 18:23:08 (-0300), Alexandre
Augusto Drummond Barroso wrote: ]
Subject: RE: Renaming (was Re: 'cvs add' client/server semantics)
I agree with you. I think the result from an annotate would be
completely different when using a "move" operation instead of
traditional "mv-remove-add" operation.
You are thinking of, or wishing for, something at a higher level than a
simple "cvs annotate". (and "annotate" is the wrong word for what you
mean, especially in the context of CVS where it has an explicit
meaning)
The idea behind using a wrapper script to implement "cvsmove" is that
it
would create predictable, parsable, log entries.
This would make it much more reliable for another _external_ history
analysis tool to decipher what was intended when it sees that a file
was
removed from one location then another file with identical content was
added to a new location.