From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2011 05:00:30 GMT
Subject: Re: Consistent terminology: cached/staged/index
Message-ID: <20110305050030.GC22976@elie>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimX3n5PNdK9YpA92SQM7G-WAiC1aPP7qJ-UEudq@mail.gmail.com>

Miles Bader wrote:

> I don't why so many people seem to be trying so hard to come with
> alternatives to "staged" and "staging area", when the latter are
> actually quite good; so far all the suggestions have been much more
> awkward and less intuitive.

*nod*  Actually, "staging area" is intuitive on first reading and
"stage" less so to me, while the alternatives tend to be more
confusing for what it's worth.

I think this thread has outlived its usefulness.  Could people with
concrete proposals (e.g., "the description of 'git add' is confusing
in such-and-such way; this rewording makes it clearer", or "the
glossary does not describe the staging area very well; how about
this description") please start new threads?

Thanks,
Jonathan