Re: address@hidden: Re: rename in cvs]

[Kaz Kylheku]

In article <address@hidden>, Paul Sander wrote:
>>--- Forwarded mail from address@hidden
>
>>[ On Thursday, October 11, 2001 at 23:12:44 (-0700), Paul Sander wrote: ]
>>> Subject: Re: address@hidden: Re: rename in cvs]
>>>
>>> >--- Forwarded mail from Greg Woods:
>>> >Let me repeat:  You DO NOT want or need to have "cvs log BAR" list
>>> >changes in the file "FOO".  To want that is illogical.  It is
>>> >unnecessary!
>>> 
>>> You do, if the version history of FOO is part of the history of BAR,
>>> having become that way by way of a reorganization of the project.
>
>>No, it's not.  That's a figment of your imagination -- not the reality
>>of what CVS is doing.
>
>You are right.  But I think the point we're trying to make is that CVS
>is doing the wrong thing, i.e. it is broken.

Not really. CVS does not support renaming. In that sense, its version
management is incomplete. Let's not confuse incompleteness with
incorrectness. Deleting a file and making a new one with the same
contents is something other than renaming. It's not broken renaming.

It only looks broken when we call it renaming; calling it renaming doesn't
make it renaming.