From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: What is missing from Git v2.0 Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 15:12:36 -0400 Message-ID: <20140425191236.GA31637@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20140424195559.GA1336@luc-arch> <5359c9d612298_771c15f72f02a@nysa.notmuch> <20140425133520.GC11124@thunk.org> <535a9f375e196_3984aa530c46@nysa.notmuch> <20140425182459.GA29329@sigill.intra.peff.net> <535aa905cd59c_44cee6530ccb@nysa.notmuch> <20140425185731.GA31454@sigill.intra.peff.net> <535ab03711d81_471d7d930822@nysa.notmuch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Theodore Ts'o , Philippe Vaucher , Javier Domingo Cansino , Git Mailing List To: Felipe Contreras X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Apr 25 21:12:48 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WdlYG-0002nG-3Z for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 21:12:48 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754692AbaDYTMl (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Apr 2014 15:12:41 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:38565 "HELO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751191AbaDYTMi (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Apr 2014 15:12:38 -0400 Received: (qmail 23907 invoked by uid 102); 25 Apr 2014 19:12:38 -0000 Received: from c-71-63-4-13.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (71.63.4.13) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 14:12:38 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 25 Apr 2014 15:12:36 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <535ab03711d81_471d7d930822@nysa.notmuch> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 01:57:59PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > Maybe I was not clear in my response, so let me try again. I do _not_ > > necessarily agree that we need to move away from the name index. > > So you agree that "the index" is a bad name, and you agree "staging area" is a > better name, yet you don't agree we should move away from the term "index"? I don't agree that "the index" is a "bad" name, because that implies some objective level of "bad". I do think the name "staging area" is fine, and I think it may even be better than "index", if we were picking a name out of the blue. I am undecided on whether we should move away from the term "index". The way you have phrased it seems like you are trying to create a logical contradiction: A is bad, B is good, therefore we should move from A to B. But that neglects the cost of moving. Frankly, I am not that interested in discussing it with you. I _am_ interested in you not using my name to claim that I believe things I do not. -Peff