From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [doc] User Manual Suggestion Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:14:36 -0400 Message-ID: <20090424231436.GA15058@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <200904240051.46233.johan@herland.net> <200904242230.13239.johan@herland.net> <20090424213848.GA14493@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Michael Witten , Johan Herland , git@vger.kernel.org, David Abrahams , "J. Bruce Fields" To: Daniel Barkalow X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Apr 25 01:16:25 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LxUd2-000713-LE for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 25 Apr 2009 01:16:21 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753147AbZDXXOs (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:14:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752674AbZDXXOr (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:14:47 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:51221 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752528AbZDXXOr (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:14:47 -0400 Received: (qmail 32355 invoked by uid 107); 24 Apr 2009 23:14:57 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:14:57 -0400 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:14:36 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 07:11:40PM -0400, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > > Let's start a reformation of the git terminology to use analogies that > > have been around since the dawn of computing: 'memory', 'address', and > > 'pointer'. > > I actually think calling them "sha1s" is better, simply because this bit > of jargon doesn't mean anything else (git deals with email, so "address" > is overloaded). And the term is already in use for this particular case, > and it doesn't mean anything else at all (since, of course, the crypto > thing is "SHA-1", not "sha1"), and it's short (which is important for > making it easy to look at usage help). Junio suggested "object name" in another thread, which I think is nicely descriptive. FWIW, I think the pointer nomenclature has terrible connotations. I think everyone who works on git groks pointers just fine, but aren't they generally reviled among the progrmaming populace as the most complex and error-prone part of learning to program? Do we really need to increase git's reputation as complex and error-prone? ;) -Peff