Re: Consistent terminology: cached/staged/index
- From
Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org>
- Date
- Mar 5, 2011, 04:53 UTC
- Message-ID
- <AANLkTimX3n5PNdK9YpA92SQM7G-WAiC1aPP7qJ-UEudq@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <AANLkTinAUsY-d3Ec6HpKbjzC+eUjGcq1LK5ODjxRC-yz@mail.gmail.com>
2011/3/5 Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>:
Show 8 quoted lines
> First I liked this proposal, but then I thought about 'git diff > --preped' (doesn't really sound right). I think the term should: > > 1) Have a nice noun version; staging area, preparation area > 2) Have a nice verb version; to stage, to prep > 3) Have a nice past-participle; staged, cached > > Casting? Forging? I don't know, staging always seems right.
I agree.
I don't why so many people seem to be trying so hard to come with alternatives to "staged" and "staging area", when the latter are actually quite good; so far all the suggestions have been much more awkward and less intuitive.
It's true that "staging area" and "stage" as a verb are most intuitive for native english speakers, but so far none of the alternatives really seem any better for non-native speakers. _All_ of these terms are "learned" to some degree, and in that sense are arbitrary, but the smoothness and intuitiveness of "staging area"/"stage" for english speakers is a real plus I think.
As for translations, is it even an issue? If term "XXX" is the optimum term in some other language, then that should be the translation for that langage, _regardless_ of what the english term used is.
-miles
-- Cat is power. Cat is peace.