Hello Junio, > > file-names. Here comes my actual question. Would it be conceptually fine > > to implement some `git patch-id` parameter, which would allow ignoring > > the file-names (or reducing those to their `basename`) before computing > > the patch id? Or would it break the concept of patch id (which shouldn't > > accept variations)? > > My gut feeling is that a tool like that would be fine as long as it > is local to your organization and is not called "git patch-id"; it > may be useful in the situation you described, but as you mention > above, it feels that it is differnt from what a patch-id is. >
Thank you very much for your feedback. That's exactly I was looking for. A clear statement from the maintainer. We will live then with a custom tool that acts like `git patch-id`, just strips the patches from file-names before computing the hash. Best regards, Eugeniu.
