Re: [PATCH 1/3] git-verify-pack.txt: fix inconsistent spelling of "packfile"

> There still are a handful of "pack-file" remaining in the
> documentation set, even after applying these three that changes
> 6 instances of 'pack-file' to 'packfile'.
> 
> git-index-pack.txt:'git index-pack' [-v] [-o <index-file>] <pack-file>
> git-index-pack.txt:                 [<pack-file>]
> git-index-pack.txt:	instead and a copy is then written to <pack-file>. If
> git-index-pack.txt:	<pack-file> is not specified, the pack is written to
> git-index-pack.txt:	<pack-file> is not specified consider using --keep to
> git-unpack-objects.txt:'git unpack-objects' [-n] [-q] [-r] [--strict] < <pack-file>
> technical/pack-heuristics.txt:    <linus> Anyway, the pack-file could easily be denser still, but
> technical/pack-heuristics.txt:    <linus> In particular, while the pack-file is then compressed,
> technical/pack-heuristics.txt:    <linus> Anyway: I'm not even trying to claim that the pack-files
> technical/pack-protocol.txt:  update-request    =  *shallow ( command-list | push-cert ) [pack-file]
> technical/pack-protocol.txt:  pack-file         = "PACK" 28*(OCTET)
> user-manual.txt:[[pack-files]]
> 
> A quick "git grep packfile" vs "git grep pack-file" inside
> Documentation/ directory indicates that we seem to use 'packfile'
> primarily in the lower-level technical documents that are not
> end-user facing.  Almost half of them are in the release notes
> that we won't bother "fixing", so it might make sense to go the
> other way around, consistently using "pack-file" that may be more
> familiar to end-users.
> 
> What do others think?