From: Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 11:53:53 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rename dirlink to gitlink.
Message-ID: <20070522115353.GI4489@pasky.or.cz>
In-Reply-To: <7vodkdbvmk.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 01:32:51AM CEST, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> "Torgil Svensson" <torgil.svensson@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > On 5/21/07, Martin Waitz <tali@admingilde.org> wrote:
> >> Unify naming of plumbing dirlink/gitlink concept:
> >>
> >> perl -pi -e 's/dirlink/gitlink/g' -e 's/DIRLNK/GITLINK/g'
> >> ---
> >
> > Does this mean that the link doesn't necessarily has to be represented
> > as a directory (even though current code does it) ?
> 
> I do not think the patch has that much deep meaning.
> 
> Personally I think the patch is similar to renaming "cache" used
> in the code to "index" --- needless code shuffling that does not
> buy you anything.

FWIW, I seriously considered making a patch for that several times - but
always found something better to do; that is, it is not so big an itch
for me to scratch unless I'd be really bored and miss some goot git@
flamewar badly ;-). However, I still think that using "cache" in the
code is a mistake - it's confusing and inconsistent.

(BTW, the other thing I hate about the codebase are the filenames. When
I want to look at the source of some command, I have to try THREE names:
git-something.<tab> (sh, perl, ...), builtin-something.c and
something.c. I wish I could just write git-something.<tab>. :-)

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
Ever try. Ever fail. No matter. // Try again. Fail again. Fail better.
		-- Samuel Beckett