Re: What is missing from Git v2.0

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Apr 25, 2014, 18:24 UTC
Message-ID: <20140425182459.GA29329@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <535a9f375e196_3984aa530c46@nysa.notmuch>

On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 12:45:27PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

> When I say literally everbody agreed to move away from the name "index" (except
> Junio and another guy) I mean it. I even composed a list:
> 
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/233469
> 
> Jeff King, Jonathan Nieder, Matthieu Moy, they all agreed.

With reference to my name, your email says:

  Jeff King:
  "staging area" makes perfect sense

But here's that statement in context[1]:

  So the term "staging area" makes perfect sense to me; it is where we
  collect changes to make a commit. I am willing to accept that does not
  to others (native English speakers or no), and that we may need to
  come up with a better term. But I think just calling it "the stage" is
  even worse; it loses the concept that it is a place for collecting and
  organizing.

In other words, I was saying that the term makes sense to me, and primarily comparing favorably to a worse proposal. I am not commenting at all on a plan to change names, which is what you are claiming above.

I do think the term "staging area" is fine, but picking a term is only step one of a plan. The rest is deciding how to make the change, and whether it is worth it. I remain undecided on the latter bits. Please don't quote me out of context in a way that implies that I am decided.

-Peff

[1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/168012