From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FC89C433DB for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 19:53:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E823A23AAA for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 19:53:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729000AbhAHTxc (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jan 2021 14:53:32 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48898 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728853AbhAHTxb (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jan 2021 14:53:31 -0500 Received: from mail-qt1-x82a.google.com (mail-qt1-x82a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7AB8C061380 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 11:52:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qt1-x82a.google.com with SMTP id y15so7399273qtv.5 for ; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 11:52:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=pe9tNNZr/SZ7FeGewoVi/QLDSVtJn7TZLSGgj6CEdoI=; b=PCAK3Gwtb559c18Y6AyY3IzD++rZonKLneKiwrPqySuK6pHDVHC+3YBHy57AUXzNzg BWhEliiZQHw5l+Dny2vR+6avNph68nJ+5McGwz/vg9jaL7vhdx9TU/rH77umYnR/Jr1K WrWu7CB8X9r0JpwMJCfPOaKWgkdtlHhyooBT5WitOrEUV4HsysWapdkL2YeZUT1BspsQ bliT2pd1aFQ5zG633E+F8VVgslEfeEQqVhB5UOncAGYPOvL1JYX3vIxSNrJHv/+K29Sj wsL787MXArcxAZz5EqZZIE3lodeEZf+JhCgtJ2wKxXt8NmCBDtX/7RuZBgaD/Id+fuyA oozw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=pe9tNNZr/SZ7FeGewoVi/QLDSVtJn7TZLSGgj6CEdoI=; b=gfVcF8lM3Z+btOnY5793IZaUIumycK4f9LvXH8y8wsqhtnzX9kiwgpBSDGGPYTExSu inOuLDwBGrqSPU3cj0Gr7PLwB15OdFHat7KAguElBumF18jiz53mwU1aFuDiPmRcvKk7 qgmSPL8oSpMRutHHnLlWw1UrWLemAtSl9B4JFPNLLsptO+aEcdcMEnqD0jorrQU22REw oBT3Xw3fRYwqXs5mCZP/y5hAlOPOeu8XDGRoqX0Ca2wdA225GDeNxx90w96WgjciawQG S7pBThFllB6wKTUukb2GrEk+NEhRKo4h6E7g21w933s8LSwlNqahYyUGSPPv4Edw+X4M Dqxg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533OrG8VLrAkc1V7fpGl6vbDzryaC19LlXxcStj2HZHGMv/Hu+QY iH57DesrOnropZiXa59yO52VfQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw3+MFiOVzMQ32zMCMlk9zsKjWyQyQ1dU6Xsce4J4m5q/SCfhQW8E2LMRT4XB8uTeb36E3wgA== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7606:: with SMTP id t6mr5020852qtq.214.1610135570824; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 11:52:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([8.9.92.205]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l1sm4977956qtb.42.2021.01.08.11.52.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 08 Jan 2021 11:52:50 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2021 14:52:48 -0500 From: Taylor Blau To: Utku Cc: Taylor Blau , Utku Gultopu via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: remove "directory cache" from man pages Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 02:51:05PM -0500, Utku wrote: > On the other hand, the document clearly states that the terms "directory > cache" and "cache" have been obsoleted by "index", so there is no source > of confusion there. On the man pages, there was, which was the reason I > felt the need to make this change. I thought that keeping at least one > definition of "directory cache" (where this definition clearly states > that it is an obsolete term for "index") would be helpful. > > So what are your thoughts about it? If you think it is better to remove > it, please let me know and I will remove it. I think that is a good reason to leave it as-is. Since you hadn't mentioned it in the patch text, I was wondering whether it was an omission, or you had intended to leave it that way. This patch looks good to me as-is. Thanks, Taylor