So, should I resend it with `git mv` or we will leave this file's name as it is?
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 3:23 AM, Brian Paul <bri...@vmware.com> wrote: > On 06/05/2013 03:25 PM, Kenneth Graunke wrote: > >> On 06/05/2013 12:09 PM, Arnas Milasevicius wrote: >> >>> --- >>> src/mesa/Makefile.sources | 2 +- >>> src/mesa/SConscript | 2 +- >>> src/mesa/main/draw_validate.c | 745 >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++**++++++++++++ >>> 3 files changed, 747 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> create mode 100644 src/mesa/main/draw_validate.c >>> >> >> It looks like this patch leaves the old api_validate.c file in place, so >> we would have two copies of everything. The proper way to do this is: >> $ cd src/mesa/main >> $ git mv api_validate.c draw_validate.c >> $ <edit Makefile.sources and SConscript> >> $ git commit -a >> >> That said...Brian, was this one of your ideas? I don't see much point >> to renaming this file, and renaming files makes it harder to go back in >> history with git blame and such. So unless there's a good reason, I'd >> rather leave it be. >> > > Yes, it's from my personal Mesa to-do list. Your point about git-blame is > well taken so if you'd rather not have the file renamed we can leave it > as-is. It's just another one of those little things that I've always found > annoying. > > -Brian > >
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
