Re: git vs git

From: David Lang <dlang@digitalinsight.com>
Date: Jan 30, 2006, 15:18 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0601300717120.2834@qynat.qvtvafvgr.pbz>
In-Reply-To: <d93f04c70601300714i4b7b3b58qa5aa151e3e42a413@mail.gmail.com>

this debate has taken place many times, please read the archives for the details.

short answer, no the name will not be changed unless new (as in different) arguments are made.

David Lang

On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, Hendrik Visage wrote:

Show 31 quoted lines

> Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 17:14:28 +0200
> From: Hendrik Visage <hvjunk@gmail.com>
> To: david@dgreaves.com, git@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: git vs git
> 
> Hi there,
> as few of you might know, there existed a very nice mc/norton commander
> orientated tool called git
>      Homepage:    http://www.gnu.org/software/git/
>      Description: GNU Interactive Tools - increase speed and
> efficiency of most daily task
>
> This package have been in existence since many summers, but the name choice for
> git - the stupid content tracker, seems to cause several weird problems when
> you don't want/expect it :(
>
> Could the name git perhaps be reconsideredto something like SCT? or GnuSCT?
>
> Just asking, as it do cause hassles when an environment is using git
> and suddenly
> need to load git to download newer drivers etc. and then git isn't
> working because the wrong git is in the right place :(
>
> Thanx
> --
> Hendrik Visage
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>

-- 
There are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies.
  -- C.A.R. Hoare