Git copy file preserving history [duplicate]

Answer 1

Simply copy the file, add and commit it:

cp dir1/A.txt dir2/A.txt
git add dir2/A.txt
git commit -m "Duplicated file from dir1/ to dir2/"

Then the following commands will show the full pre-copy history:

git log --follow dir2/A.txt

To see inherited line-by-line annotations from the original file use this:

git blame -C -C -C dir2/A.txt

Git does not track copies at commit-time, instead it detects them when inspecting history with e.g. git blame and git log.

Most of this information comes from the answers here: Record file copy operation with Git

Answer 2

All you have to do is:

1. move the file to two different locations,
2. merge the two commits that do the above, and
3. move one copy back to the original location.

You will be able to see historical attributions (using git blame) and full history of changes (using git log) for both files.

Suppose you want to create a copy of file foo called bar. In that case the workflow you'd use would look like this:

git mv foo bar
git commit

SAVED=`git rev-parse HEAD`
git reset --hard HEAD^
git mv foo copy
git commit

git merge $SAVED     # This will generate conflicts
git commit -a        # Trivially resolved like this

git mv copy foo
git commit

Why this works

After you execute the above commands, you end up with a revision history that looks like this:

( revision history )            ( files )

    ORIG_HEAD                      foo
     /     \                      /   \
SAVED       ALTERNATE          bar     copy
     \     /                      \   /
      MERGED                     bar,copy
        |                           |
     RESTORED                    bar,foo

When you ask Git about the history of foo, it will:

1. detect the rename from copy between MERGED and RESTORED,
2. detect that copy came from the ALTERNATE parent of MERGED, and
3. detect the rename from foo between ORIG_HEAD and ALTERNATE.

From there it will dig into the history of foo.

When you ask Git about the history of bar, it will:

1. notice no change between MERGED and RESTORED,
2. detect that bar came from the SAVED parent of MERGED, and
3. detect the rename from foo between ORIG_HEAD and SAVED.

From there it will dig into the history of foo.

It's that simple. :)

You just need to force Git into a merge situation where you can accept two traceable copies of the file(s), and we do this with a parallel move of the original (which we soon revert).

Answer 3

Unlike subversion, git does not have a per-file history. If you look at the commit data structure, it only points to the previous commits and the new tree object for this commit. No explicit information is stored in the commit object which files are changed by the commit; nor the nature of these changes.

The tools to inspect changes can detect renames based on heuristics. E.g. "git diff" has the option -M that turns on rename detection. So in case of a rename, "git diff" might show you that one file has been deleted and another one created, while "git diff -M" will actually detect the move and display the change accordingly (see "man git diff" for details).

So in git this is not a matter of how you commit your changes but how you look at the committed changes later.

Answer 4

For completeness, I would add that, if you wanted to copy an entire directory full of controlled AND uncontrolled files, you could use the following:

git mv old new
git checkout HEAD old

The uncontrolled files will be copied over, so you should clean them up:

git clean -fdx new

Answer 5

This process preserve history, but is little workarround:

# make branchs to new files
$: git mv arquivos && git commit

# in original branch, remove original files
$: git rm arquivos && git commit

# do merge and fix conflicts
$: git merge branch-copia-arquivos

# back to original branch and revert commit removing files
$: git revert commit

Answer 6

In my case, I made the change on my hard drive (cut/pasted about 200 folders/files from one path in my working copy to another path in my working copy), and used SourceTree (2.0.20.1) to stage both the detected changes (one add, one remove), and as long as I staged both the add and remove together, it automatically combined into a single change with a pink R icon (rename I assume).

I did notice that because I had such a large number of changes at once, SourceTree was a little slow detecting all the changes, so some of my staged files look like just adds (green plus) or just deletes (red minus), but I kept refreshing the file status and kept staging new changes as they eventually popped up, and after a few minutes, the whole list was perfect and ready for commit.

I verified that the history is present, as long as when I look for history, I check the "Follow renamed files" option.