Re: What is missing from Git v2.0

> >> Yes, of course there should be a list of both positive and negative
> >> tradeoffs. But I think the "overloaded" argument can be easily solved
> >> by renaming one of the overloads.
> >
> > And renaming one of a term also has costs, especially if it is one
> > that is in use in large amounts of documentation, both in the git man
> > pages, and in web pages across the web.
> 
> It's just impossible to change terms and have previous documentation
> still be valid. Sure, you can list it in the "cons" section as an
> argument, but it's not very convincing in itself because it applies to
> pretty much any interface changes. I think the main idea is to
> _improve_ the interface, which means rename things so it is more
> consistent and so concepts are easier for new comers to grasp. We
> could still support old terms for a while and eventually deprecate
> them.