Re: [PATCH] rename dirlink to gitlink.

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: May 21, 2007, 23:32 UTC
Message-ID: <7vodkdbvmk.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <e7bda7770705211612w3ce1b7dew8d48f1ddeb7d100e@mail.gmail.com>

"Torgil Svensson" <torgil.svensson@gmail.com> writes:

Show 8 quoted lines

> 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.

As an internal symbol, S_IFDIRLNK makes _much_ more sense than S_IFGITLINK, exactly because it is a mixture of S_IFDIR and S_IFLNK.

The only excuse that we _might_ want to consider the patch is that S_IFDIRLNK has not lived that long, compared to the use of word "cache" in our codebase. It's only two weeks old -- so if we were to apply this patch, we would need to do that right away, or it will be never.

But I am not _so_ enthused about the renaming in the code.