Re: Consistent terminology: cached/staged/index

> Felipe Contreras venit, vidit, dixit 14.02.2011 15:17:
>> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Michael J Gruber
>> <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> wrote:
>>> Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy venit, vidit, dixit 14.02.2011 14:14:
>>>> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Michael J Gruber
>>>> <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> wrote:
>>>>> Full disclaimer: I have an alias "staged" for "diff --cached" myself...
>>>>
>>>> Be careful with your fingers. There's a command named "git stage".
>>>
>>> I know. Can we remove it as part of 1.8.0? It's our only builtin alias.
>>
>> I have proposed before to extend 'git stage', so you can do 'git stage
>> diff', or if you alias 'git stage' to 'git s', just 'git s diff'. This
>> would not conflict with the old behavior of 'git stage $file'.

> In principle I like this a lot: a set of commands operating on/with the
> stage/index/cache consistently. It think it's similar in (good) spirit
> to our earlier attempts at INDEX and WORKTREE pseudo-revs, trying to
> give that somewhat nebulous (for noobs) index a more concrete
> "appearance", not hidden away in options (--index, --cached) and
> defaults (diff against index by default).
>
> In our case, however, I think the design principle deviates from our
> common form:
>
> git foo bar
>
> usually means "do foo" to "bar", as most of our common commands are
> verbs (being applied to the object "bar"). When it comes to subcommands
> we do have inconsistencies already (double-dashed vs. undashed, e.g.),
> but I'd prefer fewer ;)